tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/uk-elections-16825/articlesUK elections – The Conversation2019-08-14T09:57:41Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1217062019-08-14T09:57:41Z2019-08-14T09:57:41ZIs the UK ready for an election? Inside a system straining at the seams<p>Speculation has it that an <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49004486">early general election</a> is around the corner for the UK.</p>
<p>If it does come, it won’t be the country’s first unexpected election this year. The European parliamentary elections were not supposed to happen. But happen they did. And they didn’t go to plan. There were angry scenes at polling stations when many EU citizens were <a href="http://www.democraticaudit.com/2019/05/30/deniedmyvote-why-many-eu-citizens-were-unable-to-vote-in-the-european-parliament-elections/">denied their right to vote</a>. The government <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/12/government-taken-to-court-by-eu-citizens-denied-their-right-to-vote">faces a judicial review</a> over these incidents after campaign group the3million claimed EU citizens had been “systematically disenfranchised”.</p>
<p>And these problems were not necessarily a one-off. Electoral officials on the ground have done an outstanding job in recent years at operating under a perfect storm of pressures. But these pressures are gathering pace, putting the functioning of the system under threat. They’ve been able to just about paper over the cracks in a crumbling Victorian system in need of repair. But they may not be able to keep it all together much longer. </p>
<h2>The eight million missing</h2>
<p>The 2019 elections were not the only example of citizens showing up to vote and being turned away. This happens, research suggests, at all electoral events in the UK. In the 2015 general election, two-thirds of polling stations turned away <a href="https://tobysjamesdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/clark-james-poll-workers.pdf">at least one voter</a>. The most recent estimates are that <a href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/sites/default/files/pdf_file/The-December-2015-electoral-registers-in-Great-Britain-REPORT.pdf">roughly 8m people are not correctly registered</a>. This means that they are missing from the register entirely or registered at an old address.</p>
<p>This problem has been growing over several decades, but was made worse by recent reforms to require everyone to <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Comparative-Electoral-Management-Performance-Networks-and-Instruments/James/p/book/9781138682412">register individually</a>. In the past, one person in a household could register everyone in it. Reforms introduced in 2014 require everyone to add their own name to register.</p>
<p>It is more of a problem for some communities than others. <a href="https://fabians.org.uk/missing-millions/">The register</a> is less complete in urban areas (especially London) and among recent movers and private renters. Commonwealth and EU nationals, non-white ethnicities, lower socioeconomic groups, citizens with mental disabilities and young people are all also more likely to be incorrectly registered or not registered at all.</p>
<h2>Electoral services under financial strain</h2>
<p>Public sector resources have been limited for a sustained period. Cash crises in the NHS and schools have regularly made headlines. But there has been a silent crisis in electoral services departments, too. Funding for elections is provided by central government, but local authorities have to pay for the work needed to compile the electoral register. Recent <a href="https://tobysjamesdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/funding-elections-single-pages.pdf">research</a> has shown that these departments are increasingly underfunded, with more and more electoral services reporting that they were running over budget.</p>
<p>One major contributing factor to this was, again, the move to individual electoral registration. Local authorities had to spend more on stationary and staff to reach voters and process online applications. They received extra cash to ease the transition in the short term, but this funding is due to end. They are therefore about to be left with an electoral registration system that will be more expensive to run, while cuts to local government budgets continue. </p>
<p>Service cutbacks have been silently made for many years. As costs rose and budgets shrank, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09540962.2017.1351834">voter engagement work was jettisoned</a> as a “nice extra” rather than an essential public service to encourage people to have their say at the ballot box. Meanwhile, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0192512119829516">staff workloads and levels of stress</a> have been shown to be excessively high by international standards.</p>
<p>These are the conditions under which we might see <a href="http://www.democraticaudit.com/2018/08/15/audit2018-are-uk-elections-conducted-with-integrity-with-sufficient-turnout/">more people fall off the register</a>, <a href="http://www.democraticaudit.com/2018/08/15/audit2018-are-uk-elections-conducted-with-integrity-with-sufficient-turnout/">the gap between young and old increase</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/voter-id-our-first-results-suggest-local-election-pilot-was-unnecessary-and-ineffective-100859">more people turned away from polling stations</a>. They are the pressured conditions under which errors might occur during the stress of the day if staff have limited time to prepare. They are the conditions where we might see scenes such as voters locked out of polling stations, as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/may/07/election-polling-stations-lock-out">they were in 2010</a>.</p>
<h2>Victorian practices</h2>
<p>Meanwhile, elections involve archaic Victorian practices and in many areas lack transparency. If you want to complain, as many citizens did when they were turned away at the European elections, there can be major confusion about who to complain to.</p>
<p>Some write to their MP, some to the Electoral Commission and others (rightly) to their local Returning Officer. But there is no central complaints process – or system for counting how many complaints are received, which could usefully inform policy in the future. The officials who run elections and electoral registration are oddly exempt from Freedom of Information requests and it would be illegal to audit an election.</p>
<p>An overwhelming reason why people are not registered is because they think they already are. They assume that public bodies are coordinated and clever enough to share information. If I pay council tax, why can’t that information be shared with electoral services? The public assumes that this information is passed seamlessly onto the people handing out ballots in polling stations. Such common sense connected thinking doesn’t exist, however. Instead, voters are all asked to register individually – and valuable resources are spent reminding them to do so. Rather than having one single electoral register, the UK has 372. There is a patchwork of local registers held by local registration officers for their respective areas.</p>
<p>In a new report, <a href="https://tobysjamesdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2019/08/missing-millions-still-missing-pages.pdf">The Missing Millions, Still Missing</a>, my colleagues and I make recommendations on how elections can be upgraded by 2025 to bring about a modern, inclusive electoral process. They include providing a website so people can check if they are registered, registering young people in schools and universities, providing a centralised complaints system and allowing citizens to vote at any polling station.</p>
<p>Some reforms require some behind the scenes election-gadgetry, such as a single electoral register, digitally connected polling stations and in the long-term automatic registration. Voters will care little about many of these – but they are all central to upgrading British elections. </p>
<p>In preparation for a snap 2019 election, the best that can be done is to give electoral officials as much resource and notice as possible. But strategic planning should begin now to upgrade UK democracy for 2025.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121706/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Toby James has received funding from the AHRC, ERSC, Nuffield Foundation, McDougall Trust, Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust.
He is Lead Fellow on Electoral Modernisation for the All Party Parliamentary Group on Democratic Participation.. </span></em></p>Voters complained of being turned away from polling stations in the European elections, and local teams are struggling to keep registers up to date on tight budgets.Toby James, Professor of Politics and Public Policy, University of East AngliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/792622017-06-12T13:55:43Z2017-06-12T13:55:43ZWhy the hung parliament spells economic turbulence for the UK economy<p>Theresa May’s snap election wager has backfired. The supposed “Brexit election” was intended to signal the public’s support for the prime minister’s approach to the UK’s departure from the European Union. Instead, it has left her incredibly weak, without even a majority in government and her future as leader uncertain. And the economic data reflects this. </p>
<p>Markets <a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-why-uncertainty-is-bad-for-economies-64334">hate uncertainty</a>. One measure that tracks this is the UK’s <a href="http://www.policyuncertainty.com/uk_daily.html">index of Economic Policy Uncertainty</a>, which shows diminishing confidence around the country’s economic resilience. It is calculated by tracking daily articles relating to economic and political unrest in more than 650 newspapers in the UK. The higher the number, the more turbulent the economic outlook. The index surged from 286 on May 18, 2017 to a staggering peak of 521 on June 8 2017, the day of the general election.</p>
<p>This is significant because higher levels of uncertainty are <a href="http://www.policyuncertainty.com/media/EPU_BBD_Mar2016.pdf">associated</a> with greater stock price volatility and reduced investment and employment in key areas of the economy like healthcare and infrastructure. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/88odi/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="478"></iframe>
<p>The UK’s rising uncertainty levels stretch back to its EU referendum on June 23, 2016. Since then, GDP growth increased by only <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/abmi/pn2">0.84%</a> while inflation rose by <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/timeseries/d7bt/mm23">1.09%</a>. Uncertainty around the UK’s future relationship with the EU and the Brexit negotiations has caused sharp movements in currency markets as a result of investors hedging their bets and speculating on trades. The day after the referendum, the euro to sterling exchange rate fell by a massive 6.2% overnight, while economic policy uncertainty hit a <a href="http://www.policyuncertainty.com/media/Brexit_Graphs.pdf">record value of 2,661</a>. It fell a further 5.1% from June 2016 to May 2017 and 3.42% during the month of May 2017, alone. </p>
<p>The next graph shows the daily linkages between the euro to sterling exchange rate changes and economic policy uncertainty since May triggered <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/604079/Prime_Ministers_letter_to_European_Council_President_Donald_Tusk.pdf">Article 50</a> on March 29, 2017. A negative value implies that as the uncertainty index increases, the sterling to euro exchange rate tends to fall. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/173366/original/file-20170612-10242-j8r0ri.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/173366/original/file-20170612-10242-j8r0ri.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=397&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/173366/original/file-20170612-10242-j8r0ri.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=397&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/173366/original/file-20170612-10242-j8r0ri.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=397&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/173366/original/file-20170612-10242-j8r0ri.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=498&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/173366/original/file-20170612-10242-j8r0ri.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=498&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/173366/original/file-20170612-10242-j8r0ri.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=498&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It is clear that the negative relationship between policy uncertainty and the euro to sterling exchange rate is intensifying. This implies that increases in economic policy uncertainty are met with depreciations in the sterling to euro exchange rate running up to June 9, 2017.</p>
<h2>Downward direction</h2>
<p>Amid the result of a hung parliament, the euro to sterling exchange rate changed from €1.154/£1 on June 8 (the day of the election) to €1.139/£1 on June 9, 2017 (when the result became clear); an overnight plummet of over 1.25%. When comparing this change with June 24, 2016, the fall does not seem too severe, but the key issue is whether sterling will continue to depreciate against the euro. </p>
<p>The chart below shows the actual euro to sterling exchange rate changes from May 18, 2017 to June 9, 2017 and forecast ranges for the next few days. Although these forecasts suggest the possibility that sterling could bounce back, the lower bound implies that by June 14, sterling could be as much as 2.3% lower – relative to the euro – than the day before. The fact that sterling has been falling – reaching a low of €1.131/£1 just before midday – since markets opened on June 12, suggests that it is going in one direction. Down. </p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7tJng/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="500"></iframe>
<p>Brexiteers <a href="https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-does-a-lower-pound-boost-manufacturing-77052">argue</a> that export-led businesses in the UK will benefit from a favourable exchange rate. Indeed, the UK exports 44% of its goods and services to the euro area and with persistent depreciations in sterling relative to the euro, this makes UK exports more competitive. </p>
<p>This is all well and good while the UK is still a member of the single market. In the longer-term, the absence of free trade, coupled with the possibility of a sour deal, points toward the imposition of tariffs on UK exports. In turn, euro area nations may be encouraged to (freely) trade with remaining EU member states for comparable goods and services; a threat that businesses regard a risk <a href="http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/agentssummary/2017/may.pdf">at a three year horizon</a>.</p>
<h2>A lack of credibility</h2>
<p>So the markets are clearly unconvinced of the prime minister’s message of strength and stability. The next graph shows the daily exchange rate volatility between the euro and sterling over the election campaign period. The daily volatility of exchange rate changes on June 9, the day after the election, was 0.35%, a staggering 0.2 percentage points higher than a month earlier. It shows the markets are worried.</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/c4W8P/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="460"></iframe>
<p>This rising exchange rate volatility also hurts export-led firms. It results in them acting cautiously, as their future earnings and investments remain exposed to <a href="https://theconversation.com/hard-evidence-does-a-lower-pound-boost-manufacturing-77052">the risk of exchange rate fluctuations</a>. </p>
<p>The implication here is that currency markets do not feel the government’s current position for Brexit negotiations is strong. This, coupled with May’s lack of support in the general election, should put her leadership into question, particularly when it comes to entering divorce talks with the EU. The very fact that the domestic political landscape of the UK is shrouded by yet another layer of uncertainty suggests that economic policy, the exchange rate, and indeed the wider economy, is in for a rough ride.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79262/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mike Ellington received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council to complete his PhD from October 2013 to October 2016.</span></em></p>Markets hate uncertainty and the economic data reflects the turbulent nature of British politics.Mike Ellington, Research Associate in Finance, University of LiverpoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/792372017-06-10T16:50:51Z2017-06-10T16:50:51ZReport card: how well did UK election forecasters perform this time?<p>When Theresa May announced on April 18 that she would call a snap general election, most commentators viewed the precise outcome of the vote as little more than a formality. The Conservatives were sailing more than 20% ahead of the Labour party in a number of opinion polls, and most expected them to be swept back into power with a <a href="https://theconversation.com/snap-election-a-win-win-for-theresa-may-shell-crush-labour-and-make-brexit-a-little-easier-76362">hefty majority</a>.</p>
<p>Even after a campaign blighted by manifesto problems and two terrorist attacks, the Conservatives were by election day still comfortably ahead in most polls and in the betting markets. According to the spread betting markets, they were heading for an overall majority north of 70 seats, while a number of forecasting methodologies projected that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour could end up with fewer than 210. </p>
<p>In particular, an <a href="https://betting.betfair.com/politics/uk-politics/general-election-2017-final-predictions-070617-171.html">analysis</a> of the favourite in each of the seats traded on the <a href="http://betfairpredicts.com/">Betfair market</a> gave the Tories 366 seats and Labour 208. The <a href="http://predictwise.com/">Predictwise</a> betting aggregation site gave the Conservatives an 81% chance of securing an overall majority of seats, in line with the large sums of money trading on the Betfair exchange. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.predictit.org/Contract/6154/Will-the-Conservatives-win-329-or-fewer-seats-in-the-2017-UK-snap-election#data">PredictIt</a> prediction market, meanwhile, estimated just a 15% chance that the Tories would secure 329 or fewer seats in the House of Commons (with 326 technically required for a majority), while the <a href="https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics">Oddschecker</a> odds comparison site rated a “hung parliament” result an <a href="https://archive.is/vbSEk">11/2 chance</a> (an implied probability of 15.4%). Only the <a href="http://www.almanis.com/">Almanis</a> crowd forecasting platform expressed any real doubt, putting the chance of a Conservative overall majority at a relatively paltry 62%.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results">In reality</a>, the Conservative party lost more than a dozen seats net, ending up with 318 – eight short of a majority. Labour secured 262 seats, the Scottish National party 35, and the Liberal Democrats 12. Their projected vote shares are 42.4%, 40%, 3% and 7.9% respectively.</p>
<p>So did the opinion polls do any better than the betting markets? With the odd exception, no. </p>
<h2>Out of the ballpark</h2>
<p>In their final published polls, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/07/tories-on-12-point-lead-over-labour-in-final-pre-election-poll">ICM</a> put the Tories on 46%, up 12% on Labour. <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/News/uk/politics/election-poll-latest-tory-win-results-corbyn-theresa-may-a7777781.html">ComRes</a> predicted the Tories would score 44% with a 10-point lead. <a href="http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/herald-bmg-research-final-voting-intention-poll-gives-tories-13-lead/">BMG Research</a> was even further out, putting the Conservatives on 46% and a full 13% clear of Labour. <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/07/two-methods-one-commitment-yougovs-polling-and-mod/">YouGov</a> put the Tories seven points clear of Labour (though their constituency-level model did a lot better), as did <a href="http://opinium.co.uk/political-polling-4th-june-2017/">Opinium</a>; <a href="https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/ipsos-mori-final-election-poll-2017?language_content_entity=en-uk">Ipsos MORI</a> and <a href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/">Panelbase</a> had them eight points clear on 44%.</p>
<p>Other polls were at least in the ballpark. Kantar Public put the Tories 5% ahead of Labour, and SurveyMonkey (for the Sun) called the gap at 4%. <a href="http://survation.com/conservative-lead-labour-dropped-16-points-month-whats-going/">Survation</a>, the firm closest to the final result in their unpublished 2015 poll, this time put the Conservatives on 42% and Labour on 40%, very close to the actual result. Qriously (for <a href="http://www.wired.co.uk/article/election-polls-labour-conservative-winner">Wired</a>)​was the only pollster to put Labour ahead, by three points.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4YDQWXHOlcM?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</figure>
<p>According to the <a href="http://electionforecast.co.uk/">2017 UK Parliamentary Election Forecast</a> polling model, the Conservatives were heading for 366 seats, Labour 207, and the Liberal Democrats seven. Allowing for statistical uncertainty, the projection was of an “almost certain” overall majority for the Conservatives. The probability of a hung parliament was put at just 3%. All misses – though that doesn’t necessarily reflect on the model, which after all can only be as good as the polls fed into it.</p>
<p>Many others were wrong, too. The 2017 <a href="https://electionsetc.com/">General Election Combined Forecast</a>, which aggregates betting markets and polling models, forecast a Conservative majority of 66 seats. Other “expert” forecasts came from <a href="https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/872692409091723264">Britain Elects</a> (Tories 356 seats, Labour 219 seats), <a href="http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2017/06/estimated-conservative-majority-rises-final-ashcroft-model-update/">Ashcroft</a> (363, 217), <a href="http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html">Electoral Calculus</a> (358, 218), <a href="https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/872578720866992128">Matt Singh</a> (374, 207), <a href="https://marriott-stats.com/nigels-blog/uk-general-election-2017-forecast-1-latest-prediction/">Nigel Marriott</a> (375, 202), <a href="https://twitter.com/election_data/status/872509420336447491">Election Data</a> (387, 186), <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-win-election-2017-majority-local-elections-result-analysis-a7720771.html">Michael Thrasher</a> (349, 215), <a href="http://www.iaindale.com/posts/2017/05/07/general-election-2017-seat-by-seat-predictions-final-totals-we-re-heading-for-a-conservative-majority-of-130ish">Iain Dale</a> (392, 163) and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/06/06/can-people-rather-than-pollsters-accurately-predict-thursdays-u-k-election/?utm_term=.07ec4382bf8b">Andreas Murr and his colleagues</a> (361, 236).</p>
<p>So what went wrong?</p>
<h2>A moving target</h2>
<p>In the wake of the 2015 election, the Brexit referendum and Donald Trump’s victory, forecasters are getting used to fielding that question. But the answer isn’t that difficult: the problem is in quantifying the key factor in the common forecasting meltdown in advance. That factor is turnout, and notably relative turnout by different demographics.</p>
<p>In the Brexit referendum and <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/">2016 US presidential election</a>, turnout by <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-new-eur-referendum-bbc-analysis-age-race-educational-qualification_uk_58986ffce4b0a1dcbd02faf7">poorer and less educated voters</a>, especially outside urban areas, hit unprecedentedly high levels, as people who had never voted before (and may never vote again) came out in droves. In both cases, forecasters’ pre-vote turnout models had predicted that these voters wouldn’t show up in nearly the numbers they did. </p>
<p>In the 2017 election, it was <a href="https://theconversation.com/surge-in-young-voters-is-the-first-sign-of-a-return-to-proud-working-class-politics-79218">turnout among the young</a> in particular that rocketed. This time the factor was <a href="https://theconversation.com/election-pollsters-put-their-methods-to-the-test-and-turnout-is-the-key-78778">widely expected to matter</a>, and indeed get-out-the-vote campaigns aimed at the young were based on it. But most polling models failed to properly account for it, and that meant their predictions were wrong. </p>
<p>Polling is a moving target, and the spoils go to those who are most adept at taking and changing aim. So will the lesson be learned for next time? Possibly. But next time, under-25s might not turn out in anything like the same numbers – or a different demographic altogether might surprise everyone. We might not have long to wait to find out.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79237/count.gif" alt="La Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Leighton Vaughan Williams ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d&#39;une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n&#39;a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son poste universitaire.</span></em></p>Hitting a moving target is hard, and young people don't always do what's expected.Leighton Vaughan Williams, Professor of Economics and Finance and Director, Betting Research Unit & Political Forecasting Unit, Nottingham Trent UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/792182017-06-10T10:41:30Z2017-06-10T10:41:30ZSurge in young voters is the first sign of a return to proud working-class politics<p>The conventional wisdom on polling day was that Britain’s young voters would probably back Labour. Some polls found that as many as <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/election-results-latest-youth-vote-swings-for-labour-jeremey-corbyn-hung-parliament-a7780966.html">63% of under-24s</a> supported Jeremy Corbyn’s party. But before the polls closed, it was also received wisdom that young people would turn out at dramatically lower rates than their older counterparts. Everyone knows the story of young abstention: since the 1990s, young people have been harangued and pestered with celebrity endorsements, catchy slogans and broken promises in attempts to get them voting. But time and again, the majority vote of the young has been no vote at all.</p>
<p>The political establishment generally offers two inadequate explanations. One is poor engagement: the idea that while there’s nothing essentially wrong with the politics on offer, young people just don’t bother to sign up for it. The other is apathy: that young people are now so worn down by years of austerity and hopelessness that they’re stuck in their own little bubbles trying to somehow find a home and a job and make it to middle age, all the while too busy and exhausted to get educated, interested or organised.</p>
<p>These ideas are wrong. Young people aren’t different to the rest of the population. They need the same things in life. An income to rely on, a place to live and raise a family, and hope for themselves and the world around them. For too long they’ve been overlooked, treated like an outlier group of defective voters who would never participate in politics because they simply can’t be bothered.</p>
<p>Their <a href="http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/09/youth-out-in-full-force-as-72-of-young-people-vote-in-general-election-6696890/">role</a> in the 2017 result is a serious reality check – and beyond that, it speaks volumes about how rapidly Britain is changing.</p>
<h2>A new politics blossoms</h2>
<p>This election was a contest between two visions of what that change should entail. For the Conservatives, the political establishment, the pollsters and the guardians of conventional wisdom, British politics has become Brexit politics. The Conservatives aligned themselves with the Leave vote to gobble up UKIP votes and to capitalise on a supposed Leave-Remain split in Labour’s core vote. The Tory campaign was a monolithic construction of repetitive slogans and negative, personal attacks on leading Labour figures.</p>
<p>The Labour campaign approached things differently, and came to the country with an entirely different vision. Theirs was a campaign of economic visions: austerity versus anti-austerity – those who profit from cuts versus those hurt by them. This naturally resonates with young Britons, the first generation since World War II expected to be <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36821582">worse off than their parents</a>. </p>
<p>Young people were Labour’s base; the question was whether they would show up. In the end they did. When the now-famous <a href="https://theconversation.com/ge2017-can-you-trust-that-surprise-exit-poll-79170">exit poll</a> came in, the political establishment people immediately began rifling through the pre-election polls for signs of discrepancies. Was a hung parliament even possible? Why was YouGov’s prediction <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/07/tories-on-12-point-lead-over-labour-in-final-pre-election-poll">more accurate</a> than ComRes’s? </p>
<p>If you study young people’s politics, you probably did what I did: put the polls aside and looked at turnout. A high turnout – especially in young constituencies and seats that encompass universities – spelled trouble for the Conservatives, especially after months of <a href="https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/politics/news/86514/record-breaking-numbers-registered-vote-deadline-day">record-breaking voter registration</a> and a Brexit referendum that had young voters fired up.</p>
<h2>A better life</h2>
<p>The signs were there long before polling day. Just think about the set-piece moments of Corbyn’s campaign. Turning up at a gig at <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2017/may/21/jeremy-corbyn-music-festival-tranmere-rovers-ground-video">Tranmere Rovers football stadium</a>. The rallies in cities where people were climbing trees and buildings to watch. The music, including the huge swell of pride and hope in the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/39951532/why-uk-grime-artists-are-backing-labour-leader-jeremy-corbyn">grime scene</a> and chants to the tune of the White Stripes’ <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-40217100/jeremy-corbyn-serenaded-by-supporters">Seven Nation Army</a> – these aren’t just the cultural markers of a young social movement. They are the first green shoots of a return of proud, organised working-class politics.</p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"871812247563227136"}'></div>
<p>Young people are at the heart of it all. If you’re young and living in Britain today, you’re less likely to hold a steady job than a series of insecure gigs, leaving you with a <a href="https://www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/reports/rsa_good-gigs-fairer-gig-economy-report.pdf">jumbled CV</a> of zero-hours contracts and unreliable work. No savings, high rent, and huge tuition fees if you’re fortunate enough to make it into higher education. No-one should be surprised that young people offered this dismal social contract instead opted for the promise of investment in the welfare state, secure contracts, and an end to tuition fees.</p>
<p>This movement (and a movement it truly is) will live or die by the success of its central project: to prove that a country as prosperous as Britain can and should invest in itself to bring up and support those who have been left out by austerity. This will mean organising the young people who’ve been inspired to vote and making sure they see their votes make a tangible difference. </p>
<p>Everyone who’s part of this surge needs to make plans to keep the movement going and give young people some control over their own lives. Perhaps this work will be done through Corbyn’s Labour Party, the unions, or something completely new and unexpected – but wherever it happens, the next few historic months will be critical.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79218/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Benjamin Bowman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Younger voters have been patronised and overlooked for too long – and when politics is meaningful for them, they take part with gusto.Benjamin Bowman, Teaching Fellow in Comparative Politics, University of BathLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/788222017-06-07T09:09:27Z2017-06-07T09:09:27ZTo sleep or not to sleep? Everything you need to know about #GE2017 election night<p>It’s going to be a long night as the UK goes to the polls for its snap 2017 general election. So should you stay up all night or take a democracy nap? Here are the key moments to look out for and the seats which might indicate early on whether Theresa May has secured the thumping majority she originally envisaged. </p>
<h2>The polls close at 10pm</h2>
<p>The doors will shut and ballot boxes will be sealed up and transported to one of the counting centres across the UK. In some places, this involves travelling a significant distance, so delays can occur. In Scotland, helicopters have been used to transfer boxes from remote islands to the mainland.</p>
<p>Counting clerks will then work through the night to count the votes in most cases. If you’re feeling tired by this point, remember that many of these officials will have begun work at 6.30am (or earlier) setting up the poll. </p>
<h2>Will there be an exit poll and will it be reliable?</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/general-election-2017">IPSOS-Mori’s exit poll</a> will be reported on the BBC and Sky News at 10pm as soon as polls close.</p>
<p>At the last election, the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32428768">exit poll</a> caused quite a stir. Announced on the BBC at 10pm, it forecast that the Conservatives would be the largest party. It took an immediate bashing with Paddy Ashdown infamously stating that he would “eat his hat” if it was correct. He had to eat his hat.</p>
<p>As it turned out, that poll was much closer to the eventual reality than polls that took place before the election. The exit poll is therefore a crucial clue as to how things will unfold.</p>
<p>We should nevertheless take exit polls with a pinch of salt. They’ve been wrong before, as they were in <a href="http://www.conservativehome.com/video/2012/04/the-1992-election-bbc-exit-poll-predicts-a-hung-parliament.html">1992</a>. They are based on samples which may not be representative of the whole population, but exit polls do have the advantage of asking people what they really did, rather than what they intend to do at some point in the future. </p>
<h2>When might we expect local results?</h2>
<p>A local returning officer is responsible for the counts in their area and declarations will drip through during the early hours of the morning. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/does-sunderland-always-declare-election-results-first/">Sunderland</a> traditionally works hard to make its announcement first. Constituents in Houghton &amp; Sunderland South might hear their result as early as 11pm. The result in Sunderland Central generally comes an hour later. After that, things will go quiet. Then there will be a rush of results between 3am and 5am. A handful of constituencies will be as late as noon on Friday. </p>
<p><strong>The distribution of estimated declaration times</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=390&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=390&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=390&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=490&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=490&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/172325/original/file-20170605-16877-1nfxak5.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=490&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When to expect results, based on information from the Press Association.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>When will we know who has won?</h2>
<p>Ah, that’s the million dollar question. “Winning” usually means getting 326 seats. This would allow the party leader to have a majority of the seats in parliament. They would then be able to form a government and pass policies without needing the support of another party.</p>
<p>There won’t be enough declarations for a party to have won 326 seats until 4am. And as many seats will go in different directions, it will be much later before a party has won enough constituencies to form a government.</p>
<p>But political scientists and the media will be identifying underlying trends from the early results to get a sense of the overall outcome. Armed with information about the underlying demographic and political makeup of constituencies, we can expect changes in voting patterns to be similar in similar constituencies (on average).</p>
<p>My University of East Anglia colleague Chris Hanretty estimated that Remain had only a 0.03 probability of winning the Brexit referendum by 2:03am. It was zero by 3am. That was long before the politicians (and media channels) cottoned on to what was unfolding. Watch for such forecasts again. </p>
<h2>When will we know who the next PM is?</h2>
<p>If there is decisive victory with one party winning an overall majority, then that party leader will be quickly confirmed as prime minister on Friday morning.<br>
But if no party reaches the magic 326 seats, then there might be some wait. Negotiations will begin between parties about whether they could form a coalition to take them over that threshold. In 2010, it took five days for the Cameron-Clegg coalition to form. There was some surprise in Britain that this process took so long. But in some countries it takes much longer – 541 days after the <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379411001430">Belgian elections</a> which took place at around the same time.</p>
<p>And what if Theresa May wins a majority – but a much less handsome one than David Cameron in 2015? Given that a landslide was originally predicted for this election, she might even face an internal coup.</p>
<h2>Could any seats give an early indication?</h2>
<p>If the Conservative party shows signs of winning seats off other parties then they are on track to stay in government. Chris Hanretty has helpfully identified a list of those predicted gains for the Conservatives.</p>
<p>The table below lists the first 25 of these to be called. If they turn blue as expected, Theresa May will be on course to stay in power with an enhanced majority (and 365 seats, according the <a href="http://www.electionforecast.co.uk">electionforecast.co.uk</a> predictions).</p>
<iframe src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Ptot9/1/" scrolling="yes" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" webkitallowfullscreen="webkitallowfullscreen" mozallowfullscreen="mozallowfullscreen" oallowfullscreen="oallowfullscreen" msallowfullscreen="msallowfullscreen" width="100%" height="1000"></iframe>
<h2>So should I stay up … or go to bed?</h2>
<p>The hard-core psephologist stays up, and stays the course. The more sensible, normal person stays up for the 10pm exit poll, necks a hot chocolate and gets some kip. Be up early for 4am and you should still have plenty to see. But then again, British politics has been rather unpredictable lately.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78822/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Toby S. James has previously received funding from the ESRC, AHRC, British Academy, Leverhulme Trust, Electoral Commission, International IDEA and the Nuffield Foundation for his work on electoral administration. This article does not reflect the views of the research councils. </span></em></p>When can we expect the first results and which are the seats to watch? Plan your night with our guide.Toby James, Senior Lecturer in British & Comparative Politics, University of East AngliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/785542017-05-31T10:23:10Z2017-05-31T10:23:10ZHow to settle social care funding once and for all<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171503/original/file-20170530-23653-ayxt92.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Social care needs taking care of.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Branding it a “dementia tax” was inspired – opponents of the Conservative Party’s election manifesto <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/4a2a842e-3ed9-11e7-9d56-25f963e998b2">railed against</a> its fundamentally unfair proposals for dealing with the social care costs of increasing numbers of old people with dementia. Theresa May’s U-turn took less than a long weekend. But there is still massive unfairness in the provision of care for those no longer able to look after themselves.</p>
<p>First, there is the issue of fairness with respect to the illness lottery. If a member of your family gets cancer, the National Health Service will offer the best treatment for as long as it takes to cure them, or provide palliative care in a hospice free of charge. If a member of your family gets dementia, the NHS tends to keep its distance, apart from an occasional visit from the local dementia nurse, to check how the dementia is progressing. </p>
<p>Only if there is also a health problem, such as an ulcer or an infection, does the NHS swing into action. The contrast between “health care” and “social care” is marked. And let’s forget the other option <a href="https://www.continuing-healthcare.co.uk/do-i-have-to-pay-for-care-home-fees?">of “continuing care”</a> funding for long-term illnesses because it is far from clear cut and has complex eligibility criteria.</p>
<p>There is also a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/dec/12/social-care-spending-falling-postcode-lottery">postcode lottery</a> on the provision of care. Help with care for someone living with dementia in their own home comes not via the NHS but via the local authority. If the patient has more than £23,250 in savings, the help comes in one of three forms: either nothing (you’re told to use private care agencies); a limited, fee-paying service; or, if you’re very lucky, a notional lump sum which the patient’s family can choose how best to spend. Which you get depends on which local authority is responsible. </p>
<p>Another lottery depends on whether you are cared for at home or in a home. At the moment, if care is provided at home, the value of the home is not included in the calculation of assets. But if your family member goes into a care home, the local authority can require the sale of the home <a href="http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/care-homes/the-means-test-and-your-property/">to pay the fees</a> – when there is not enough income – except in certain special circumstances. Even the ability to negotiate with the local authority <a href="https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/deferred-payment-agreements-for-long-term-care#am-i-eligible-to-use-a-deferred-payment-agreement">to defer the sale of the home</a>, for example if someone is still living there, is another postcode lottery.</p>
<h2>A logical solution</h2>
<p>Just as with cancer, it is unfair to penalise someone financially just because they have a degenerative condition. As with cancer, not everyone is affected. So the logical solution is to increase national insurance or income tax, which is paid for by everyone. That, after all, is how the NHS is funded. </p>
<p>And we’re talking small beer here. NHS costs and social security benefits linked to pensioners together account for £133 billion, whereas the total bill for social care for older people <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/ec9fa110-3ef9-11e7-82b6-896b95f30f58">is just £7 billion</a>. The savings which May was trying to make on social care were worth around £2 billion; she’s promised an additional £8 billion for the NHS. </p>
<p>In the <a href="https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/self-funding-your-long-term-care-your-options#other-options-for-funding-your-long-term-care">absence of affordable insurance products</a> to cover potential care costs of hundreds of thousands of pounds – whether at home or in a care home – the only fair solution is to pay for this small element of care the same way as the NHS, through income tax. If people with more valuable property are expected to pay more towards their care – and this is a political decision – then some form of tax related to wealth or property will increase costs for the asset rich. </p>
<p>But if people needing social care are expected, unlike cancer patients, to contribute to their costs, then the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130221130239/https://www.wp.dh.gov.uk/carecommission/files/2011/07/Fairer-Care-Funding-Report.pdf">Dilnot Report</a> offers the solution: a floor and a cap. </p>
<p>The report’s proposal was, like May’s, to have a floor of £100,000 in assets, below which social care for the patient would be provided for free. That is a sensible decision. But, importantly, the Dilnot Report also proposed a cap of £35,000, precisely so as not to penalise unfairly those who will need long-term, full-time care. </p>
<p>So, up to £35,000 might be taken from the patient’s assets, with accommodation costs in a care home or at home being paid for by the patient’s pension income. Such a cap was deemed feasible to fund using part of their housing wealth, either through downsizing, taking out an interest-only loan tied to their house or new mortgage-based solutions. This was <a href="http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/care-homes/social-care-funding-changes/care-cap-and-means-test-changes/">later increased</a> to £72,000 by David Cameron’s government and was due to come into force in 2020, as was a cap on accommodation costs of £12,000. </p>
<p>In contrast, May’s <a href="https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto">manifesto commitment</a> was simply to remove the cap. The entire estate of the patient – apart from the last £100,000 – could go toward care costs over which the family had little control. It was fair in one way only: it treated people being cared for at home equally with those in a home. But it was completely unfair for a condition which, like many cancers, has a term and severity which cannot be forecast in advance. </p>
<p>Since U-turning on the idea and saying there will now be a cap on what people must pay towards their own social care costs, May has refused to say what the cap would be. Instead she <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40005257">has emphasised</a> the need for more consultation on the issue.</p>
<p>But there is no need for another green paper, or additional discussion. The best brains have already discussed and evaluated the options. It is only the political will to increase income or wealth taxes that is lacking (as well as any insurance solutions). So, let’s implement the Dilnot Report’s recommendations on social care cost floors and caps and move on, as with cancer, to trying to cure dementia.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78554/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Janette Rutterford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Theresa May's U-turn on social care funding shows how hard it is to fix. But there is a logical solution.Janette Rutterford, Research Professor, True Potential Centre for the Public Understanding of Finance, The Open UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/757572017-05-30T10:55:07Z2017-05-30T10:55:07ZThe UK has its economic focus all wrong – why investment-led growth is needed<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171149/original/file-20170526-6367-1wk6ctf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The UK has had a chronic lack of investment. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Scrutiny of the party manifestos has so far been focused on the differences in their <a href="https://theconversation.com/manifesto-check-do-labour-party-tax-and-spending-plans-add-up-77883">“tax and spend” policies</a>. But the approach to investment is just as important. As the economist Marianna Mazzucato <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUsWd2OrEkE">said recently</a> on BBC Newsnight, the UK economy desperately needs investment-led growth.</p>
<p>In fact, dealing with the UK’s chronic lack of investment is as important as getting the Brexit negotiations right – and much more important than balancing the books. Attempts to revive the UK economy since the financial crisis have so far simply inflated the prices of existing assets such as property and shares. Economic growth has been driven solely by an expansion of consumer credit, which builds domestic debt. This only stores up later economic problems. As I argue in the book, <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Public-Policy-beyond-the-Financial-Crisis-An-International-Comparative/Haynes/p/book/9780415674393">Public Policy Beyond the Financial Crisis</a>, the UK needs an investment-led recovery that builds real value.</p>
<p>It is encouraging to see political manifestos for the general election that talk up national investment strategies – as the major parties do. But it is worrying when these ideas appear secondary to balancing the government deficit. Investment should be a bigger priority than a government surplus. UK investment is <a href="http://www.economywatch.com/economic-statistics/economic-indicators/Investment_Percentage_of_GDP/">low and below average</a> compared to its competitors.</p>
<h2>New investment needed</h2>
<p>Just before the election was called, the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/treasury-committee/inquiries1/parliament-2015/post-2008-uk-monetary-policy-16-17/publications/">published evidence</a> for its inquiry into monetary policy. Some of the evidence shows that the reason ordinary people have been left behind is because of the failure of policies such as quantitative easing where money was injected into the economy by the Bank of England purchasing financial assets. This is a link even Theresa May made in her <a href="http://www.cityam.com/250794/theresa-may-criticises-bank-england-making-people-poorer">speech</a> at the most recent Conservative Party conference.</p>
<p>The criticism is that such policies help the rich get richer. By causing asset inflation, they increase inequality. Evidence submitted by the <a href="http://neweconomics.org/">New Economics Foundation</a> think tank tells of the need for <a href="http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/treasury-committee/effectiveness-and-impact-of-post2008-uk-monetary-policy/written/48262.html">productive investment</a>. This is investment that creates new assets to strengthen the post-Brexit economy such as new housing, transport, renewable energy and digital technology.</p>
<p>Investment in this kind of new infrastructure is a reliable path to future economic growth and stability. As the UK starts the uncertainty of the Brexit process, a national investment strategy is the best hope for securing future growth.</p>
<h2>What the manifestos say</h2>
<p>The party manifestos take seriously the issue about getting investment to flow to the right productive places. The Conservatives <a href="https://www.conservatives.com/manifesto">promise</a> a £23 billion National Productivity Investment Fund. It will target housing, R&amp;D, skills and digital infrastructure. The policy promises to invest a total of £170 billion by 2022. </p>
<p>Labour <a href="http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/labour-manifesto-2017.pdf">say</a> that borrowing will be used for investment. A National Transformation Fund will invest £250 billion over ten years. There is a commitment to sharing investment across all regions. A major priority is new railways. Low carbon energy generation also gets a mention, as does super fast broadband. The National Transformation Fund will be facilitated by a National Investment Bank. This will have a firm footing in the devolved regions. It will set the priorities for lending.</p>
<p>The Liberal Democrats <a href="http://www.libdems.org.uk/manifesto">commit</a> to a £100 billion package of additional infrastructure investment. House building is a top priority with a target set of 300,000 new units per year. A British Housing and Infrastructure Bank is proposed as the vehicle to allocate this productive credit. Public money will attract private credit. </p>
<p>The Scottish National Party will introduce an <a href="https://www.snp.org/manifesto_plain_text_extended">investment fund</a> for small and medium sized businesses with an overall focus on raising productivity. The Green Party <a href="https://www.greenparty.org.uk/green-guarantee/">wants</a> investment to be targeted at community credit and local green investment.</p>
<h2>Best chance for growth</h2>
<p>It’s clear that investment is the best chance for economic growth. Yet much of the economic debate remains fixated on the size of the country’s budget deficit – with the major parties at pains to show how they will “balance the books”.</p>
<p>But a government surplus cannot even offer stability. In fact, economist <a href="https://stephaniekelton.com/">Stephanie Kelton</a> at the University of Missouri–Kansas City suggests that a surplus can lead to other problems. When the government is in surplus, an excess of credit flows to private investors. For example, the “<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/how-bill-clintons-balanced-budget-destroyed-the-economy-2012-9?IR=T">Clinton surplus</a>” of the 1990s is blamed for the private credit binge of the following decade. This resulted in the great financial crash.</p>
<p>Economists are closely <a href="http://kommunekredit.com/Files/Filer/KK_dk/nyheder/Nordic%20sovereigns.pdf">watching</a> the growing domestic credit growth in new government surplus countries such as <a href="https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2015/02/17/2119329/how-will-the-oil-crash-affect-norway/">Norway</a> and <a href="https://www.thelocal.se/20161220/sweden-reports-a-budget-surplus-for-2016-pats-itself-on-back">Sweden</a>. This credit flow does not necessarily feed productive growth. It often just pushes up <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/21/soaring-house-prices-in-sweden-an-unnecessary-reality-analyst.html">house prices</a>.</p>
<p>With parliament dissolved, the monetary policy inquiry is frozen, and the respected chair, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/25/andrew-tyrie-stand-down-conservative-mp">Andrew Tyrie</a> has stood down as an MP. Meanwhile, the prime minister’s election campaign is focused on Brexit and “<a href="https://theconversation.com/strong-and-stable-leadership-inside-the-conservatives-election-slogan-77121">strong and stable leadership</a>”. There is a danger that the importance of changing monetary policy will be forgotten.</p>
<p>The mothballing of the Treasury Select Committee inquiry is disappointing to those who have been campaigning for new approaches to banking, credit allocation and investment. With some recent bad news about inflation overtaking wages, will Theresa May remember the important link between monetary policy and inequality?</p>
<p>The current election debates need to keep the review of monetary policy alive and move beyond a focus on fiscal credibility. The campaign group <a href="http://positivemoney.org/">Positive Money</a> is working hard to keep the issue on the election agenda. They ask the public to challenge candidates about the <a href="http://positivemoney.org/2017/05/election-video/">role of the Bank of England and monetary policy</a>. Productive investment is what the British economy most needs at the present time.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/75757/count.gif" alt="La Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Philip Haynes has received previous funding from the ESRC, government departments and voluntary organisations.</span></em></p>Dealing with the UK's chronic lack of investment is as important as getting the Brexit negotiations right – and much more important than balancing the books.Philip Haynes, Professor of Public Policy, University of BrightonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/775222017-05-10T15:53:21Z2017-05-10T15:53:21ZNo charges in Conservative party election spending affair – here's why<p>The Crown Prosecution Service <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-election-spending-rules-latest-no-charges-cps-conservatives-candidates-electoral-law-crown-a7727711.html">has ruled</a> that no charges will be brought against Conservative Party candidates following an investigation into how 2015 campaign spending was reported. </p>
<p>The ruling came around ten years after several of Tony Blair’s close colleagues were arrested in the so-called <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2007/oct/11/partyfunding.uk">“cash-for-honours”</a> inquiry – an investigation into loans to the Labour Party and subsequent receipt of life peerages that shook the political landscape. Although the CPS brought no charges then, that episode served to throw certain loopholes and discrepancies into sharper focus.</p>
<p>When questioned about the utility of the police investigation into the Labour party case, then Met Assistant Commissioner John Yates offered words that seem particularly apt following this latest CPS decision:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>These types of cases are very, very difficult to prove because they are bargains made in secret. Both parties have an absolute vested interest in those secrets not coming out.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is the very challenge that faced the CPS in the Conservative election expenses probe.</p>
<h2>Going back to the start</h2>
<p>The accusation in the Conservative case was that the party incorrectly reported spending on a number of things – including expenses for a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conservative-election-expenses-saga-explained-59484">Battle Bus</a> and hotel rooms for activists – as local spending when they might actually have been national expenditure. In electoral law there are (seemingly) strict rules and limits on what qualifies in each category.</p>
<p>In March, the Electoral Commission levied a <a href="https://theconversation.com/q-a-how-the-conservatives-landed-a-70-000-fine-after-an-expenses-scandal-74711">£70,000 fine</a> to the Conservative Party – the largest ever amount – for these discrepancies. The Electoral Commission found that three parliamentary by-elections in 2014 “understated the value” of the party’s spending. It also ruled that some payments “were not party campaign spending” and others “omitted other party campaign payments”.</p>
<p>That there was wrongdoing is beyond doubt. The Conservative Party did misreport some local spending as national spending – that was the specific remit of the Electoral Commission investigation. But the question for the CPS was whether that spending had been deliberately misreported and whether a mistake had been made.</p>
<h2>The burden of proof</h2>
<p>The specific offence which the CPS was investigating was section 82(6) of the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2">Representation of the People Act</a> (RPA). This states that “if a candidate or election agent knowingly makes the declaration required by this section falsely, he shall be guilty of a corrupt practice”. The CPS must prove that any suspects knew spending returns were inaccurate, and therefore acted dishonestly in signing the declaration.</p>
<p>In this case the CPS found that although there was evidence to suggest the returns were indeed inaccurate (essentially the findings of the Electoral Commission) there was “insufficient evidence to prove to the criminal standard that any candidate or agent was dishonest”.</p>
<h2>Whitewash?</h2>
<p>Within minutes of the decision being announced #toryelectionfraud was trending on Twitter, alongside accusations that both the Electoral Commission and the CPS had effectively sold democracy down the river. But this is no whitewash. The legal bar in this case was simply too high. The CPS had to effectively prove intent to mislead. That proof was not found.</p>
<p>The distinction between local and national expense can lead to a rather sticky wicket for the Electoral Commission to play on. Party expenditure law is, to say the least, rather complex. There can be quite legitimate disagreements around what classifies as local and national spend. These distinctions can often be quite confusing.</p>
<p>A perfect example from this election is the number of <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/how-the-conservatives-are-using-local-adverts-to-get-around?utm_term=.qabMWp03z#.fu3kKazvn">“wraparound” adverts</a> that the Conservative Party has placed in local newspapers. At a glance this might look like a classic example of local expenditure. These are (presumably) aimed at a number of Conservative target seats around the country. However, because they mention only Theresa May and the Conservative Party, rather than specific constituency candidates and local issues, they classify as national spend. Like a national billboard, wrapped around a local paper.</p>
<p>Again, there can be legitimate arguments about whether that situation is right or fair, but there can be no arguments that it is not (legally) legitimate.</p>
<p>What is often forgotten when discussing the professionalisation of politics, slick campaigning machines and the potential of shadowy electoral conspiracies, is that much of the donkey work on campaigns is done by volunteers. In recommending regulation, there has to be a fine line between catching genuine dishonest intent and discouraging civic engagement. There’s no point in prosecuting poor Doris or Derek from the local constituency party because they offered to be the treasurer that year (when no-one else volunteered) for not fully grasping the ins and outs of the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/41/contents">Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act</a> or the RPA.</p>
<h2>What now?</h2>
<p>An <a href="http://www.kentlive.news/prosecutors-will-announce-whether-south-thanet-mp-craig-mackinlay-faces-charges-today/story-30323927-detail/story.html">investigation in Thanet</a> is ongoing, but in all other respects: case closed. But while the Conservative funding is not – and should not – be considered a whitewash, it should be cause for concern. There seems to be a genuine case to (re)investigate whether electoral law is fit for purpose.</p>
<p>In its summary decision in March, the Electoral Commission noted the risk that “political parties might come to view the payment of these fines as a cost of doing business”. Indeed, <a href="https://academic.oup.com/pa/article/68/suppl_1/133/1403322/Party-Finance-The-Death-of-the-National-Campaign">academic work</a> analysing the 2015 election suggests that national campaign spending is now a highly targeted effort which largely supported constituency campaigns. That, to all intents and purposes, the difference was cosmetic.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tory-expenses-scandal-mp-threatens-to-help-abolish-electoral-commission-for-witch-hunt_uk_5913079be4b05e1ca2036999">Karl McCartney</a>, one of the MPs cleared in this case, suggested that the Electoral Commission should be abolished. A more sensible solution would be for all parties to get around the table, with the Electoral Commission and others, and understand where the weaknesses in the current regulation is and work at updating and improving legislation which today is unfit for purpose.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77522/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sam Power receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. This article does not reflect the views of the research councils. </span></em></p>The decision not to take action against a number of election candidates is not a whitewash, but it shows that the law needs a rethink.Sam Power, Doctoral researcher, Sussex Centre for the Study of Corruption, University of SussexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/772812017-05-08T13:08:59Z2017-05-08T13:08:59ZManchester's mayoral election: turnout was low but there is hope for the future<p>When George Osborne <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-29876939">announced</a> in November 2014 that Greater Manchester was to get its own directly elected “metro mayor”, he lauded the potential for dynamic civic leadership to develop the city-region’s economy and transport infrastructure. Then in a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-on-building-a-northern-powerhouse">speech in May 2015</a>, the former chancellor said a directly elected mayor would mean “a stronger democracy” as it would provide a single point of accountability – a leader “who takes the decisions and carries the can”. </p>
<p>But the portents for radical democratic renewal were more questionable. Turnout in the only combined mayoral elections in England in London were variable, ranging from 34% in the inaugural elections in 2000 to 45% in 2016. Moreover London mayoral elections have grown increasingly bitter and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/londons-mayoral-election-how-the-battle-between-a-muslim-and-a-wealthy-environmentalist-got-ugly/2016/05/02/1c068dfe-0e29-11e6-bc53-db634ca94a2a_story.html?utm_term=.6ceaa143b9e4">febrile in tone</a>, with personality politics dominating in part because of a lack of significant governing powers available to the winner. </p>
<p>As the vanguard city-region underpinning the wider <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/northern-powerhouse-14267">Northern Powerhouse</a> vision of the Cameron governments, the Greater Manchester mayoral elections were a critical litmus test offering insights into the possibility that metro mayors outside London could stimulate local democracy. </p>
<p>But the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/05/andy-burnham-elected-mayor-of-greater-manchester">election of Andy Burnham</a> with a turnout figure of 28.9% does not, at first glance, suggest widespread voter interest or engagement. This figure was strongly boosted by a comparatively high turnout in the borough of Trafford of 38% – where two of his opposing candidates are councillors. Only 25% of voters in Rochdale and Salford made it to the polling booths. In comparison, the average turnout for local elections across Greater Manchester was 35% in 2016, a full 6% higher, and 30% for the 2016 Salford mayoral election. However, there were fears in some sections of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority that turnout would actually be much lower. </p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"860384267079122944"}'></div>
<p>So why will the fist “DevoManc” mayor take office with such a limited democratic mandate? From the outset, the position of metro mayor lacked clarity. The acceptance of a mayor as part of the regional devolution deal was undertaken without prior consultation, which meant most people had little idea of the remit or purpose of the new office. For many, the imposition of a metro mayor was confusing as they had recently rejected the principle of mayoral-led local government in <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-17949390">the referendum of 2012</a>. </p>
<p>Residents in Salford were also faced with the challenge of a “double mayor” and were left to work out who would be responsible for what. Public pronouncements by some <a href="http://www.publicsectorexecutive.com/Public-Sector-News/mayoral-model-step-backwards-for-greater-manchester-leese">local authority leaders</a> raised questions about the remit and purpose of the metro mayor and revealed concerns about the extent to which they might disempower those same local leaders.</p>
<h2>No visible presence</h2>
<p>The election also highlighted the extent to which the main political parties were organisationally unsuited and maybe unwilling to embrace the introduction of metro mayors. For example, the Labour party is organised at ward (or branch), constituency, and north-west regional levels. This meant there was a lack of clear organisational structures to support its mayoral candidate in campaigning for the new position. The mayoral candidates were largely left to raise funds on their own and promote their own campaigns. </p>
<p>This meant that, unlike <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/01/andy-street-mayor-campaign-spending-labour-sion-smith-west-midlands">Andy Street</a>, the Conservative mayoral candidate in the West Midlands, their campaigns were under-funded and also lacked sufficient party “foot soldiers” to post election leaflets and engage potential voters. As such, the election as a whole lacked a visible presence beyond the official <a href="https://www.gmelects.org.uk/">“GM Elects”</a> campaign and candidate booklet.</p>
<p>There was some good local reporting on the election – most notably from <a href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-mayoral-election-candidates-2017-12521146">Jennifer Williams</a> and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-38733342">Kevin Fitzpatrick</a> – but London-based national media coverage was distant and sporadic, particularly when compared to the capital’s own mayoral election last year. The decision to announce <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/theresa-may-uk-general-election-8-june">a snap general election</a> further undermined the mayoral elections. Once called, the main political parties in Greater Manchester diverted their campaigning energies to the June general election. </p>
<h2>A new old politics?</h2>
<p>The picture, however, is not all bleak. It was refreshing to see a campaign fought in a competitive but cordial spirit where the main candidates did not resort to personality politics based on negative spin and public defamation of their opponents. And due to the organisational shortcomings outlined above the candidates were forced into taking up more traditional politics with regular <a href="http://www.itv.com/news/granada/story/2017-04-25/manchester-mayoral-elections-2017/">public hustings</a> taking place across the region. This encouraged a robust democratic political culture more akin to Scotland than Westminster and also provided <a href="https://theconversation.com/inspiring-the-devolution-generation-in-greater-manchester-75790">young people with opportunities</a> to engage with and shape political debate to a much greater extent than in local and national elections. </p>
<p>Groups such as the <a href="http://www.peoplesplangm.org.uk/">People’s Plan</a> and <a href="http://www.divamanc.org/">DivaManc</a> also extended and enriched the campaign, bringing in and engaging with different groups of citizens by providing opportunities to consult and debate politics in innovative and important ways. </p>
<p>But the inaugural Greater Manchester mayoral election ultimately highlighted the limitations of an elite-driven, bespoke and often confusing approach to devolution in England which has left many voters unsure of its aims and relevance to their lives. To ensure greater citizen engagement and participation in future elections Mayor Burnham – and indeed the country’s <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39817220">other metro mayors</a> – will need to prove he is an effective political alternative to Westminster. The lack of a significant electoral mandate in terms of turnout means Burnham will need to hit the ground running and articulate a coherent vision of regional government and secure further powers for the city-region. </p>
<p>The strengthening of democracy in Greater Manchester and the other city-regions is not the metro mayors’ responsibility alone. The main political parties now need to reconsider how they approach future mayoral elections, recalibrating organisational networks and campaigning resources to ensure future mayoral candidates have sufficient funding and support. Broadcast and print media must also provide more in-depth analysis when covering regional politics. But most importantly, civil society and academia needs to think, debate and act more locally and regionally to encourage a new politics that is the envy of the rest of the country.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77281/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Mycock does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>What we can learn from the election of the new 'metro mayors' and why there are reasons to be cheerful.Andrew Mycock, Reader in Politics, University of HuddersfieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/770592017-05-05T14:26:27Z2017-05-05T14:26:27ZEvery election, politicians ignore England – here's why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/167710/original/file-20170503-21616-l31xa2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It&#39;s there. It&#39;s right there! </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In UK general elections, England matters. It accounts for 82% or 533 out of 650 constituencies in the national parliament. At the 2015 general election, 318 (or 96%) of the Conservatives’ 330 seats were won in England, as were nearly <a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7186#fullreport">93% of the their votes</a>.</p>
<p>Of Labour’s 100 most vulnerable seats, 86 are in England. For the Conservatives, 81 of the top 100 most vulnerable are also <a href="http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative">constituencies in England</a>. </p>
<p>If Prime Minister Theresa May is to achieve a much increased majority at Westminster in 2017, it will be in England that her electoral fate will be predominantly determined. A key question is how many of the 3.6m voters who backed UKIP in 2015.</p>
<p>What’s more, important issues such as the NHS, education, higher education and housing are devolved, so this election will feature many England-only policies.</p>
<p>The cuts that need to be made to the <a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06702#fullreport">national funding formula for schools</a>, for example, apply only to schools in England. It’s only the NHS in England that needs to address a forecast £30 billion <a href="https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/5yfv-web.pdf">funding gap</a> by 2020-21. And it’s also only the NHS in England that has been described as facing a <a href="http://blogs.redcross.org.uk/health/2016/11/funding-care-autumn-statement/#more-48370">“humanitarian crisis”</a> by the Red Cross.</p>
<p>Simple electoral arithmetic and political logic therefore suggests that the politics of England should feature front and centre in the 2017 general election campaign in England.</p>
<h2>A hole in the political map</h2>
<p>Paradoxically, not one of the major UK political parties has yet announced plans to produce a dedicated national manifesto for England. They are, as usual, producing UK plans, and the two parties always produce manifestos for the much smaller constituencies of Wales and Scotland but have not mentioned England.</p>
<p>The explanation for this is simple but goes to the heart of why the British power elite has become so detached from the electorate in England.</p>
<p>Despite their manifold differences over Brexit, the one thing which has continued to unite the leaderships of the UK’s three major political parties is their overt British nationalism. They share the conviction that political narratives of national renewal must mean British renewal, delivered via the institutions of the centralised British state.</p>
<p>Most recently, this has been manifested in May’s <a href="https://www.planforbritain.gov.uk/">Plan for Britain</a>. This policy purports to be aimed at building a “stronger, fairer” country, even though <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/justine-greening-education-at-the-heart-of-our-plan-for-britain">devolution</a> to the administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland means that it can only really be a “Plan for England”.</p>
<p>May, Jeremy Corbyn, Tim Farron and others therefore have been observing one of the unwritten laws of British nationalism. This states that no party shall publish a manifesto for England during a UK general election campaign, because it might challenge the authority of the British state. It might jeopardise Westminster’s capacity to continue to govern England in the centralised, top-down fashion to which the British party political power elite have become accustomed.</p>
<p>Only once has this unwritten law been challenged. During the 2015 general election campaign, David Cameron and William Hague launched the Conservative Party’s first ever <a href="https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/politics/news/63208/david-cameron-english-manifesto-launch-full-text">English manifesto</a>. It was the first such manifesto by any major political party.</p>
<p>However, even then Cameron began his <a href="https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/politics/news/63208/david-cameron-english-manifesto-launch-full-text">launch speech</a> on the defensive, stating: “Let me be clear: we do not support English nationalists … we do not want an English parliament … we are the Conservative and Unionist Party through and through and through.”</p>
<h2>Fearing nationalism</h2>
<p>Cameron was articulating one of the enduring characteristics of the British power elite, from Tony Blair to May. Any demand for an English parliament or devolution to England amounts to English nationalism.</p>
<p>However, there is nothing intrinsically nationalistic about the desire to enhance either the process of English governance or the creation of a democratic, institutional civic English national identity to better reflect the increasingly plural and multicultural population of England.</p>
<p>For the British party political power elite, the danger of opening up an English political narrative is that the English electorate might begin to look a bit more closely at the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/539465/PESA_2016_Publication.pdf%5D">funding formula</a> that sustains the British union. They might ask why identifiable public spending in England, at £8,638 a person in 2014-15, is 14.6% lower than in Wales (£9,904). They might wonder why it’s as much as 20.1% lower than in Scotland (£10,374) and 28.6% lower than in Northern Ireland (£11,106).</p>
<p>Voters in England might also question why <a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/LIF-2017-0034">mayoral elections</a> are being held in six combined authorities across the country. This despite the fact that more than two-thirds of mayoral referendums and no fewer than nine out of ten cities, have voted to reject an elected mayoral system of governance. No voter in England has sanctioned these decisions in a referendum.</p>
<p>In the 1975 European Community referendum, England voted 68.7% in favour of staying in the European Community. It was the most europhilic of the nations of the UK. By June 2016, England had become the most eurosceptic of the nations. It voted 53.3% to leave the European Union and was decisive in determining the referendum’s outcome.</p>
<p>One key lesson for the British power elite is clear: ignore the national politics of England at your peril.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77059/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon Lee does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It accounts for a huge proportion of votes, yet parties rarely offer English-specific policies.Simon Lee, Senior Lecturer in Politics, University of HullLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/772062017-05-04T21:04:13Z2017-05-04T21:04:13ZCrushing the opposition: is victory guaranteed for the Conservatives? Election Weekly podcast<p>In a brand new podcast we bring you expert analysis of the 2017 UK general election campaign. We’ll be with you right up until polling day on June 8, helping to cut through the noise to make this snap election as painless as possible. </p>
<p>This episode takes a broad look at the parties and the options on the table for voters at this early stage in the campaign. The Conversation’s politics editor, Laura Hood, runs through the important issues of the week with Andy Price, head of politics at Sheffield Hallam University, and Matthew Cole, teaching fellow at the University of Birmingham. </p>
<p>Do the Conservatives have the election all wrapped up? Andy and Matt compare the party’s lead in the polls with historical examples and caution against hubris. While the polling continues to look good, we consider whether the PM has taken her <a href="https://theconversation.com/strong-and-stable-leadership-inside-the-conservatives-election-slogan-77121">“strong and stable leadership”</a> message into the realms of “aggressive and presumptous” in her dealings with Brussels. </p>
<p>Tactical voting and the prospect of a <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-progressive-alliance-is-a-once-in-a-generation-chance-that-must-be-taken-in-election-2017-76604">progressive alliance</a> of parties opposed to the Conservatives is also up for discussion, with some mixed opinions about whether a pact is possible and how it would be achieved.</p>
<p>And how serious was Diane Abbott’s media wobble at the beginning of the week? The Labour front bencher was roundly mocked for fluffing her numbers on the radio, but we hear that voters might not remember the incident for long. Though the same might not necessarily be true for Labour party insiders. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>Music in Election Weekly is Chasin’ It, by Jason Shaw. A big thank you to City University London’s Department of Journalism for letting us use their studios.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/77206/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Expert analysis of that infamous Brexit spat, tactical voting and Diane Abbott's media meltdown.Laura Hood, Politics Editor, Assistant Editor, The Conversation UKAnnabel Bligh, Business + Economy Editor, The Conversation UKLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/758732017-04-28T08:12:45Z2017-04-28T08:12:45ZMetro mayors and the city as an underperforming brand<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166613/original/file-20170425-23807-15rdi05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/castlefield-inner-city-conservation-area-manchester-255819034?src=rkwNFSKiVoibRKdB8zH7oQ-1-2">Shahid Khan/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It has been 179 years since the inauguration of the first Mayor of Manchester and the city is just about to elect a new incumbent. During this time, the office <a href="http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/200033/councillors_and_decision-making/1158/the_lord_mayors_office/3">has been held by more than a hundred men and women</a>. But the role has changed significantly over the years. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166618/original/file-20170425-12640-1a548si.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166618/original/file-20170425-12640-1a548si.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=790&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166618/original/file-20170425-12640-1a548si.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=790&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166618/original/file-20170425-12640-1a548si.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=790&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166618/original/file-20170425-12640-1a548si.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=993&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166618/original/file-20170425-12640-1a548si.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=993&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166618/original/file-20170425-12640-1a548si.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=993&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sir Thomas Potter painted by Samuel William Reynolds.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.artuk.org/discover/artworks/alderman-sir-thomas-potter-206553">Manchester Town Hall</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It began as an influential leader of political, social and economic reform and ended up as one of mere ceremony. Sir Thomas Potter, <a href="http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/200033/councillors_and_decision-making/1158/the_lord_mayors_office/4">Manchester’s first mayor</a>, was a wealthy businessman, <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-british-studies/article/culture-and-the-middle-classes-popular-knowledge-in-industrial-manchester/DAA09FE9D9EC319B3C9FDC64C9A9BB14">a liberalist</a>, and co-founder of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/gnm-archive/2002/jun/11/1">Manchester Guardian</a>. In May last year, <a href="http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/200033/councillors_and_decision-making/1158/the_lord_mayors_office">Councillor Carl Austin-Behan</a> was sworn in to office. Carl was Manchester’s first openly gay Lord Mayor. This was of great significance given the city’s LGBT achievements but of little everyday consequence as the office had become little more than a formality. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, in the good old tradition of history repeating itself, the city’s next mayor – to be elected next month – will take on a civic leadership role with real power and financial clout. </p>
<p>Not unexpectedly, the new position of Greater Manchester Metro Mayor has attracted <a href="https://www.gmelects.org.uk/downloads/file/2/statement_of_persons_nominated">eight contenders</a>. Perhaps, more surprising, was the announcement that longstanding, local Labour MP <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/commons/andy-burnham/1427">Andy Burnham</a>, was standing for election. </p>
<p>Usually, the career trajectory of a politician goes from the local to the national – not the other way round. However, Manchester is an attractive proposition for a would-be political investor like Andy Burnham. You could think of him as a bit like a private equity funder eyeing up an under-performing brand that is ripe for some targeted investment. Along with a bit of sensible and joined-up management and a good dose of positive PR. </p>
<p>Over the last ten years, there has been a growing body of research into the practice of place branding and management. While much of this is <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JPMD-08-2016-0055">critical</a> of transplanting business practices to places, there are a couple of relatively unproblematic applications to be recommended to the new mayor, whoever that turns out to be. </p>
<p></p>
<h2>It’s NOT grim up north</h2>
<p>First, a bit of <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JPMD-08-2016-0055">reputation management</a> would not go amiss. This should take the form of communications campaigns engineered to challenge decades of “grim up North” stereotyping. Second, a clear vision along with some place-based decision making is needed if the new mayor is going to have a chance of undoing years of <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17538330810865363">siloed</a> and disconnected policy making.</p>
<p>This has systematically failed to address the complex and interconnected nature of problems in the city region. So, the mayor’s new, integrated <a href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/idiots-guide-greater-manchester-mayor-12521146">£6 billion health and social care budget</a> is an important step, as long as some clear outcomes are set. </p>
<p>Mayors are also expected to set the direction of travel. <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/what-impact-do-metro-mayors-have-on-the-cities-that-elect-them/">Evidence from Bristol</a> suggests that citizens perceive the leadership of mayors as much more visible than everyday politicians. Evident, observable leadership is more likely to engender confidence – not only in people’s ability to tackle deeply embedded problems, but externally, too. Visible leadership acts as a boost to a city’s image. </p>
<p>In Bogota, for example, two elected mayors (Antanas Mockus and Enrique Penalosa) have been credited with lifting the city from “violence and dysfunction” to “<a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GiRNDQAAQBAJ&amp;pg=PA38&amp;lpg=PA38&amp;dq=mayor+bogota+city+rankings&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=A1aJbJLkav&amp;sig=1HSGwDUgS0AwLYxxRXi1W0X2OAk&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwik5OGawa3TAhXIZFAKHedfDggQ6AEIaDAJ#v=onepage&amp;q=mayor%20bogota%20city%20rankings&amp;f=false">world capital status</a>”.</p>
<p>Of course, it is important to not get too carried away with the allure of the Metro Mayor. Cities are not just their mayors; they are their <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/17538331311306087">people</a>. So focusing on the populations’ health (<a href="http://www.centreforcities.org/greater-manchester/">an approach that the electorate already seems to support</a>) is important. </p>
<p>The skills gap in the city region does not appear to be such a vote-winner, however, even though it is likely to be hampering regional <a href="http://www.centreforcities.org/greater-manchester/">employment and productivity</a>. This is important as it is where a mayor can leave a meaningful, personal legacy. All too often, civic leaders tend to focus on the physical – like infrastructure (think Boris Bikes) or “<a href="http://krqe.com/2017/02/27/albuquerque-mayor-hopes-to-add-new-iconic-building-to-citys-skyline/">iconic</a>” buildings. Most likely this is because these types of interventions can be commissioned <em>and</em> completed within their time in office. </p>
<h2>Making a difference</h2>
<p>Changing the prognosis for the long-term unemployed, the unskilled, the “<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/1467-923X.12285/asset/poqu12285.pdf?v=1&amp;t=j1lxxryh&amp;s=1e65ca6ed129b2ba30ebc559454930f7fa9c88a9">left-behind</a>” is not so easy. Nevertheless, educational achievement <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/from-fail-to-world-s-best-a-lesson-from-the-east-end-8996454.html">can be improved in specific locations</a> and this is another aim our new mayor could at least catalyse. </p>
<p>Making a difference <em>somewhere</em> and being close to the action as a metro mayor could make for a far more influential political career than being insignificant or aloof in Westminster. The apathy and <a href="https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3685/Politicians-are-still-trusted-less-than-estate-agents-journalists-and-bankers.aspx">distrust</a> people feel towards their MPs suggests that national politics is no longer an arena for actually engaging with people. </p>
<p>Likewise, for the foreseeable future, it is probable that a substantial amount of parliamentary time will be spent discussing Britain’s exit from the EU. This makes it highly unlikely that current MPs will be remembered, individually, for anything much at all – regardless of the result of June’s election.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Eight candidates are bidding to be mayor of Greater Manchester. The others are: Sean Anstee, Conservative; Mohammad Aslam, Independent; Jane Brophy, Liberal Democrats; Marcus Farmer, Independent; Stephen Morris, English Democrats; Shneur Odze, UKIP; and Will Patterson, Green Party.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/75873/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Cathy Parker is affiliated with The Institute of Place Management, the Journal of Place Management and Development and the Labour Party. This article reflects her personal opinions.</span></em></p>Cities could be viewed as under-performing brands – ripe for a bit of focused investment and visible leadership from the new metro mayors.Cathy Parker, Professor of Marketing and Retail Enterprise, Manchester Metropolitan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/766042017-04-25T10:36:32Z2017-04-25T10:36:32ZA progressive alliance is a once-in-a-generation chance that must be taken in election 2017<p>It’s already becoming clear that every party except the Conservatives fears the outcome of the impending <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/uk-election-2017-37907">general election</a>. Even for the SNP, which will no doubt hold on to – if not improve upon – its standing in the last election, the prospect of an increased Tory majority is not a welcome one.</p>
<p>Barring a massive Labour recovery – and barring the impact of unplanned events, so crucial in politics – it appears this is almost certainly the outcome to expect. But even if that Labour recovery does come, is Jeremy Corbyn the man to steer the UK through <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/eu-referendum-2016">Brexit</a> and its consequences?</p>
<p>Whether they like it or not, for most voters, this election will come down to a choice between Corbyn and May, rather than their parties. And the sad truth is, many may find themselves in the unwelcome position of believing that neither is the leader the UK needs.</p>
<p>Danger ahead, then, in GE2017, for an already badly tarnished political class. Turning out for the third major national vote in two years is tiring enough for those people who are just carrying on with the crucial business of getting on with their lives; asking those same people to turn out to vote for two options they find equally unpalatable is worse still. It could cause lasting damage to relations between voters and the political class.</p>
<p>So what’s to be done to reengage people? With appetite for this election seemingly so low, and with the outcome already near certain, the first thing we must do is view the present situation as an opportunity to renew the business of politics in the UK. GE2017 should be seen as nothing short of a once-in-a-generation opportunity to break out of the Labour-Tory duopoly that the nation has clearly outgrown.</p>
<p>Discussions among some of the smaller parties have already turned to this. The Greens have called for a “progressive alliance” between those parties lined up to oppose the Tories and their Brexit at all costs. Even the SNP has <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/nicola-sturgeon-general-election-snp-progressive-alliance-tories-conservatives-out-power-labour-a7691186.html">nodded assent</a> if it were to become a realistic option. Labour leaders have discounted it fully. But they should reconsider.</p>
<p>The finer details of what this would entail (including tactical voting and electoral pacts) will take many hours, days and weeks of negotiation to flesh out, including the thorny issue of who would lead this alliance were it to somehow secure a big parliamentary role after the election. But that is highly unlikely, and therefore should not be the primary concern. The first thing to consider should be the process of putting this alliance together. Here are some essential ingredients we would need at the start.</p>
<h2>A long-term vision</h2>
<p>A progressive alliance is not just for GE2017 – it’s for life. The parties need to see this as more than just a short-term project. The shifts in the electoral landscape of the UK in recent years mean that the likelihood of an outright majority for the main party of the left is receding into the distance. The shift to the SNP in Scotland – formerly rich hunting ground for Labour – and the rise of UKIP as an alternative for swing voters in formerly marginal seats has dealt the Labour party a blow that may ultimately prove fatal.</p>
<p>The likelihood of ever-increasing Tory majorities is also growing as a result of an ageing population and an ever-more disenfranchised youth vote (coupled with upcoming boundary changes). The plan for a progressive alliance forged in the white heat of GE2017 should explicitly be about challenging this growing rightist, Tory hegemony. And the parties and politicians involved should say so.</p>
<p>They should point to a new, long-term political grouping on the left that will more closely match a deindustrialised, multi-cultural Britain; that will more accurately appraise the place of Britain in the world and its responsibilities to other nations and the international community; that will not just celebrate membership of the EU but celebrate European history and identity, too; that will put electoral reform at the heart of its manifesto; and, perhaps most importantly of all, that will put the impending ecological crisis at the very centre of political life. </p>
<h2>Bravery</h2>
<p>To make all of this happen, however, a further ingredient is necessary – and that’s bravery. This may sound gallant and overblown, but far from it. To call for some of the things above is to go against the political advice from strategists that has held sway for at least the past 40 years.</p>
<p>All of the above have consistently been sold as vote losers, if not electoral suicide. Never make the case for the EU and its attendant loss of national sovereignty; never go into an election talking of electoral reform; never remind voters of the environmental damage associated with their lifestyles. If you do, conventional political wisdom has it, you will turn voters off, and lose badly.</p>
<p>But this kind of advice is a self-fulfilling prophecy: if you accept the central premise of this stuff, that these issues are vote losers, and then try to sell them in an election, then yes, you are doomed from the outset.</p>
<p>However, if your starting point is that the positions above are fine positions for a mature, 21st century democracy, then there is so much more to sell to the electorate in each of them – so much to sell in membership of the European Union and European identity itself, and in electoral reform (that is, in essentially making people’s votes actually count for something). And while it might not be a popular thing to say right now, there is so much to sell about globalisation, about opening up to different cultures and nationalities from around the world. And there is certainly a lot more to sell in the rewards of leading a greener life.</p>
<p>But when do we see mainstream politicians championing any of these things? I can count on one hand the politicians who, in my lifetime, have proudly championed the European Union. And, apart from the <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/09/alternative-vote-liberal">Liberal Democrats</a>, who has ever made the case passionately for electoral reform that could meaningfully devolve power to people beyond London? And of course, despite there being many champions of economic globalisation and the spread of capitalist consumerism, can we remember any politician making the positive, proud case for free movement of people, welcoming immigrants and the valuable enriching cultural accoutrements they bring?</p>
<p>No, it doesn’t happen. All are seen as detrimental to electoral success. So politicians need bravery in the name of risking that success.</p>
<h2>What’s at stake?</h2>
<p>This progressive alliance is needed now more than ever precisely because progressive values are under intense pressure. It is needed for openness to survive, for tolerance, respect, the rule of law and polite society to survive.</p>
<p>And make no mistake: they are indeed under threat in GE2017. Not because Theresa May, or the Tories, or the right in general are somehow naturally malevolent. Far from it. </p>
<p>These values are under threat because of the issues that the present government is tapping into and the tools it is using to protect its Brexit agenda. It is in a weak, defensive position because Brexit, in its current hard form, is undeliverable without much economic and social upset.</p>
<p>Going on the offensive, then, seems to be the only option on the table. It’s difficult to do otherwise: a defence of the indefensible is not possible or sustainable; only attack. The result is a cabinet of ministers who belittle anyone seeking to scrutinise them and a prime minister who announces a <a href="https://theconversation.com/just-who-exactly-is-playing-games-theresa-may-and-political-opportunism-76418">snap general election</a> with incredible belligerence, claiming it to be in the national interest. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/enemies-of-the-people-mps-and-press-gang-up-on-the-constitution-over-high-court-brexit-ruling-68241">Brexit-obsessed elements of the media</a> then helps her to sell that line.</p>
<p>This strategy makes rational sense for GE2017 on many levels. But in unleashing ever darker forces to protect itself from weakness, the government is pitting Remainer against Leaver, left against right, them against us, like never before.</p>
<p>These are the forces confronting progressives in GE2017, forces unlike any others in the history of peace and stability post-1945. So vastly different are they, the response to them must also be of an entirely different order. The question now is, do we have the politicians, the advisers, the academics and the writers brave enough to stand up and champion those new, progressive forces? We can only hope so.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76604/count.gif" alt="La Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andy Price ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d&#39;une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n&#39;a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son poste universitaire.</span></em></p>It will take bravery and vision, but a deal between opposition parties is the only sensible way to respond to a changed political landscape.Andy Price, Head of Politics, Sheffield Hallam UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/764962017-04-24T10:23:21Z2017-04-24T10:23:21ZCan we trust the opinion polls in election 2017?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166147/original/file-20170420-20057-cxd9jz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Political opinion polls have taken a bit of a battering in the past few years. There was wide agreement on the eve of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/revealed-why-the-polls-got-it-so-wrong-in-the-british-general-election-53138">last UK general election</a> that the outcome would be a hung parliament. Few pollsters saw Donald Trump winning the 2015 presidential election in the US. And almost everyone agreed that <a href="https://theconversation.com/eu-referendum-how-the-polls-got-it-wrong-again-61639">Brexit</a> would not happen. So are opinion polls worth the paper they’re written on any more?</p>
<p>Polling made its entrance onto the political stage in the United States presidential election of 1936, at a time when various prominent American newspapers were confidently predicting victories for Republican <a href="http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5168/">Alf Landon</a> on the basis of polls of their (rich, unrepresentative) leaderships. <a href="http://time.com/4568359/george-gallup-polling-history/">George Gallop</a> realised that he could achieve much more accurate predictions reasonably cheaply by taking a random sample of the population, and by doing this successfully forecast a landslide victory for Franklin D Roosevelt.</p>
<p>The key words in this statement are “random sample”, and this is where modern day polling is running into trouble. When Gallop began building his market research empire, gauging public opinion was a complicated business. It involved sending trained interviewers out to randomly selected addresses to interview a specific named person. If they couldn’t get hold of them, they were asked to go back again and again until they found them. What pollsters call “response rates” – the proportion of people agreeing to be interviewed – were very high. So was the cost. You had to train your interviewers, send them out, and tabulate the results, which in the BC years (before computers) was done by hand using punched paper index cards.</p>
<p>However, overwhelmingly, results were good, politicians came to rely heavily on poll predictions, and newspapers got into the habit of using them in order to report politics as entertainment about who was winning.</p>
<h2>Polling today</h2>
<p>These days technology and changes in the ways political opinion polling is done allow market researchers to get answers much more quickly and cheaply. Polling can also be done by post, online, or by phone. Rather than genuinely random samples, it’s usually cheaper for market researchers to use what are known in the trade as “quota samples”. Interviewers talk to certain numbers of people in different demographic categories (by gender, income, social class, ethnic group and so on). </p>
<p>However, they face several increasingly difficult challenges. Some kinds of people are just harder to reach than others, especially people who work full time – a group who are still a bit more likely to vote for conservative parties. We are now asked our opinions about so much so pointlessly that response rates for polls are desperately low at around 25-30%. We all suffer from poll fatigue.</p>
<p>Respondents are also self-selecting. People who are interested in politics are more likely to be willing to share their views with a stranger, and also are more likely to be left wing. All of these factors mean that the samples used by the pollsters to make their predictions simply aren’t as good as they used to be, and they all tend to err in the same direction.</p>
<p>This doesn’t mean that polls are now redundant. Well-constructed surveys which are properly carried out still get representative results. For example, the sample used by the British Social Attitudes survey, carried out via face-to-face interviews and requiring revisits where the randomly selected individual was unavailable for interview, <a href="https://theconversation.com/revealed-why-the-polls-got-it-so-wrong-in-the-british-general-election-53138">correctly forecasted around a six point lead</a> for the Conservatives in the 2015 general election.</p>
<p>However, these high quality polls are expensive, and take a long time. Given that the mass media mostly wants poll numbers rapidly, and for entertainment, it hardly seems likely that they will want to make the extra investment.</p>
<p>Parties’ own internal polls do take the time and trouble and do get accurate results, ones which will no doubt have been part of the prime minister’s decision to go to the country. Current published polls show the Conservative Party has a 20 point lead over Labour, if not more. Is the true situation in the country likely to be anything other than a large Tory lead? Absolutely not: even cheap polls are not that inaccurate. As it stands, you’d be most unwise to take the 12:1 odds currently offered by some bookmakers on Labour being the largest party on June 8.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76496/count.gif" alt="La Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Wyman ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d&#39;une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n&#39;a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son poste universitaire.</span></em></p>They were way off in 2015 and for the forthcoming election in June it's worth knowing why.Matthew Wyman, Senior Teaching Fellow, Keele UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/764232017-04-20T23:20:12Z2017-04-20T23:20:12ZTheresa May's snap election gamble, explained<p>Theresa May, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, decided on April 18 to dissolve Parliament and hold snap elections on June 8. The motion easily secured the required two-thirds majority in the U.K.‘s House of Commons.</p>
<p>The decision marks a stunning reversal and has <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/18/snap-election-theresa-may-kept-cabinet-dark-left-chanting/">surprised many people</a> in her own government and abroad. May had repeatedly <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/08/theresa-may-means-what-she-says-which-why-there-will-be-no-early-general">denied</a> that she would make such a momentous decision.</p>
<p>In the U.S., we’re accustomed to a fixed electoral calendar. But, the power to dissolve Parliament is present in <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/18/snap-election-theresa-may-kept-cabinet-dark-left-chanting/">many political systems</a>, such as in the Republic of Ireland, Canada and Japan. </p>
<p>That power is used frequently in some countries like Italy and rarely in others such as Germany. It can reside in the Parliament itself, or be held by the head of state. And it is a power that can be used liberally, or only in specific circumstances.</p>
<p>In this case, May is betting that this move will result in a larger Conservative majority in Parliament and strengthen her hand for the upcoming Brexit negotiations. </p>
<p>It also means yet another crucial election in Western Europe in 2017, where France and Germany already have elections scheduled.</p>
<h2>A great power</h2>
<p>The power to dissolve Parliament dates back to the Middle Ages, and is deeply ingrained in U.K. politics. It granted the monarch the ability to dismiss the legislature at any time, limiting lawmakers’ influence. As authority shifted over time from monarchs to Parliament and the prime minister, this power remained.</p>
<p>For centuries, <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/18/fixed-term-parliaments-act/">prime ministers had to ask the monarch</a> to dissolve Parliament. In the last century, they used that privilege to shore up their party’s majority in Parliament, or to receive a personal mandate.</p>
<p>On paper, that changed with the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/14/introduction/enacted?view=plain">Fixed-term Parliaments Act</a> of 2011, which seemed to curtail the power of the prime minister. The act set a clear schedule for elections and removed the ability of the monarch to formally dissolve the Parliament, following the decision taken by the prime minister. But it also included <a href="http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06111#fullreport">two exceptions</a>. Early elections could be held: </p>
<ol>
<li>if a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least 434 Members of Parliament out of 650, as happened this week;</li>
<li>or, if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the House of Commons within 14 days. </li>
</ol>
<p>At the time, Conservative government officials led by Prime Minister David Cameron <a href="http://time.com/4744115/prime-minister-theresa-may-snap-election-problems/">argued</a> that the Fixed-term Parliaments Act would check the power of the prime minister, and prevent them from triggering elections to seek political gains. May’s successful push for a snap election shows how easily the bill can be circumvented. </p>
<p>It was essentially May, not Parliament, who <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/17eda04e-ea24-359a-8c7e-d0caed79cb5e">decided</a> to dissolve the legislature. Thus, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, as Professor of Comparative Politics <a href="https://constitution-unit.com/2017/04/18/the-fixed-term-parliaments-act-and-the-snap-election/">Alan Renwick</a> writes, “only changed the choreography, not the underlying pattern of power.”</p>
<p>May is making a calculated gamble. Despite the unpredictability of elections, she likely saw many potential rewards and few risks in an early vote. The main opposition, the Labour Party, is languishing far behind in the polls. May’s Conservative Party has an opportunity to significantly add to its slim majority of 17 votes.</p>
<p>Winning an election would provide May with a direct mandate from the U.K. public, since she was not elected and took over only after Cameron’s resignation last June. It would improve her hand with her EU counterparts but also the hardliners in her own party in the upcoming complicated Brexit talks. And, a larger majority could help stall a second referendum on Scottish independence.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76423/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Garret Martin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Wondering how the U.K. government can just decide to dissolve itself and call for a general election? As our expert explains, it's not uncommon.Garret Martin, Professorial Lecturer, American University School of International ServiceLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/763672017-04-18T14:22:15Z2017-04-18T14:22:15ZGloomy economic outlook is why Theresa May was forced to call a snap election<p>Many are asking why Britain’s prime minister, Theresa May, has called a general election despite <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/18/the-many-times-theresa-may-ruled-out-an-early-election">repeatedly saying</a> that she would not do so. From the moment she first stood for the leadership of the Conservative Party in June 2016 she <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/30/theresa-may-launches-tory-leadership-bid-with-pledge-to-unite-country">ruled out such a possibility</a>. In her Easter message on April 16 <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39607056">she suggested</a> that the country was uniting behind Brexit. Now she wants an election to resolve the issue after all.</p>
<p>But is that the real story behind this surprise announcement? Or has, as ever, economics got more to do with it? <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/18/theresa-mays-early-general-election-speech-full/">In her Downing Street address</a> announcing the election, May said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Despite predictions of immediate financial and economic danger, since the referendum we have seen consumer confidence remain high, record numbers of jobs, and economic growth that has exceeded all expectations.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This, however, glosses over some quite significant economic facts. The reality is that Britain’s economy is not in a good state. </p>
<h2>Reading the economic runes</h2>
<p>The UK’s high street is expected to see the biggest drop in retail sales, excluding food, for nearly six years in the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/11/uk-retail-sales-fall-living-costs">first quarter of 2017</a>. Rising inflation, now at a rate exceeding the Bank of England’s 2% target rate, and likely to stay there for some time to come because of deflation in the value of sterling and rising oil prices, was the <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/b423f32c-1dd4-11e7-b7d3-163f5a7f229c">suggested main cause</a> of the decline. Whatever the reason, it seems likely that consumers have realised that the post-Brexit honeymoon is over.</p>
<p>There is good reason for them to do so. The latest <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/apr2017">labour market figures</a> reveal that even though employment is technically at a record high, pay rises have been lagging. Regular pay in the UK in February was 1.9% higher than a year earlier, but is running below the 2.3% increase in prices. That means real living standards are falling. It is a trend that is likely to continue.</p>
<p>The usual recourse in this situation is for consumers to borrow. Consumer debt levels are already at such high levels, however, that the Financial Conduct Authority <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39628039">has announced</a> it is to review the whole sector and its regulation because of the threat to financial stability that it represents. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165622/original/image-20170418-32703-d8v6o0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165622/original/image-20170418-32703-d8v6o0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=357&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165622/original/image-20170418-32703-d8v6o0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=357&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165622/original/image-20170418-32703-d8v6o0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=357&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165622/original/image-20170418-32703-d8v6o0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=448&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165622/original/image-20170418-32703-d8v6o0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=448&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165622/original/image-20170418-32703-d8v6o0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=448&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Consumer credit is beginning to dry up.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The regulator may not need to worry though: as the Bank of England <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/9abf248a-202a-11e7-b7d3-163f5a7f229c?segmentId=080b04f5-af92-ae6f-0513-095d44fb3577">recently announced</a>, it seems that Britain’s banks have already reacted to the pressure on UK household incomes and the availability of consumer credit was tightened for the first time in six years during the first three months of 2017. The Bank of England also noted that credit availability was likely to get tighter as the year progressed. The option of borrowing to make ends meet and cover a shortfall in wages – that has so long been the British choice – may no longer be available for many.</p>
<p>And, as if to cap it all off, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/apr/15/average-uk-house-price-falls-1000-since-start-of-year">average UK house prices fell</a> during the first quarter of 2017. It can always be argued that this does not matter, and might even be good news (particularly for first-time buyers). That though is not the way the British take such news: rising house prices are their surest indicator of economic confidence. The reality is that this might just be draining away.</p>
<p>To add to these woes, as the government is loathe to admit, the UK still has a huge budget deficit. It’s hard to recall that the Conservative Party plan in 2010 was to fight an election in 2015 <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/7505366/Budget-2010-live.html">with no deficit</a>. The 2017 election will be fought against the backdrop of the deficit for 2016-17 exceeding £50 billion and actually expected to rise next year, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/597467/spring_budget_2017_web.pdf">with no prospect of this ceasing</a>.</p>
<p>The reality is then that, as ever with elections, there has been a mighty lot of spin from the prime minister’s announcement. The truth is May does not need an election to deliver Brexit and nothing that election will decide will stop parliament – whether it is opposition MPs or the House of Lords – interfering with the Brexit process, if it seeks to do so in the future. </p>
<p>The reality behind her change of mind is something much more commonplace. She has read the economic runes and thinks, as I do, that they do not present a pretty picture for her prospects. Come 2020, if she lets this parliament run its prescribed course, she would face a difficult electorate, fractious at the cost of a Brexit that may well have delivered on little of its promises. Calling an election now then, when the going still looks good, is May’s best chance of ever becoming an elected prime minister. In that circumstance she has succumbed to vanity, as all politicians do. Britons might all, quite literally, pay the cost of that.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76367/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Murphy receives funding from a Horizon 2020 grant from the EU paid to City, University of London. He is a member of Tax Research LLP. That organisation can make no financial gain from this article. Nor can the Fair Tax Mark Limited or Cambridge Econometrics Limited of both of which he is a director. Richard Murphy is not a member of any political party. </span></em></p>Theresa May has read the economic runes – and called an election while she still confidently can.Richard Murphy, Professor of Practice in International Political Economy, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/747112017-03-16T15:30:36Z2017-03-16T15:30:36ZQ+A: how the Conservatives landed a £70,000 fine after an expenses scandal<p>The Conservative party has been at the centre of an <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-conservative-election-expenses-saga-explained-59484">election expenses scandal</a> for over a year. The situation has now boiled over, with the party being fined £70,000 for misreporting spending in 2014 – the largest amount a British political party has ever had to pay. </p>
<p>The key allegations in this case are that in three 2014 by-elections, the Conservatives omitted campaign costs from spending returns. They also stand accused of failing to correctly report general election campaign costs. A key question is whether so-called “battlebus” expenses – spending to shuttle campaigners into constituencies – were incorrectly reported by the party as national, not local, spend.</p>
<p>The fine follows an investigation by the <a href="http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/news-releases-donations/conservative-party-fined-70,000-following-investigation-into-election-campaign-expenses">Electoral Commission</a>, which found that expense returns related to the three parliamentary by-elections in 2014 “understated the value of the Party’s spending on their campaigns”. It also says the 2015 general election spending return “was not a complete statement of its campaign spending payments” and that payments were included “that were not party campaign spending” and that “omitted other party campaign payments”. </p>
<p>All in all, the party’s 2015 general election spending return was missing at least £104,765 in payments. The Commission also found that £118,124 in payments was either not reported, or incorrectly reported to the Commission. Finally, it found that the party did not include invoices or receipts for payments to the value of £52,924. That’s £275,813, at least, that is unaccounted for. </p>
<p>Behind the jargon this means that in 2015, the Electoral Commission believe that some local spending was misfiled as national spending. This is likely to relate to spending on the buses.</p>
<h2>What is national and local spend?</h2>
<p>There are two types of spending in British elections – local and national. Each has a different limit. Limits on local spending (to promote a particular constituency candidate) are not uniform, but are often around £15,000. The limit on national spending (to promote the party more generally) is £19.5m, which is very rarely close to being reached. In 2015, the Conservatives came closest, spending £15.6m.</p>
<h2>What now?</h2>
<p>It has also <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global/2017/mar/15/second-tory-reveals-police-investigated-him-over-spending-allegations">been reported</a> that 12 police forces passed files to the Crown Prosecution Service alleging that up to 20 Conservative MPs broke the aforementioned spending rules.</p>
<p>If the CPS finds evidence of wrongdoing, the best the Conservative party can hope for are further fines being levelled to the national party. In some cases, it’s possible that elections will end up being re-run – creating a raft of potentially awkward by-elections for the party. Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage has already <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39249698">stated an interest</a> in standing again in Thanet South (presuming he’s not too busy in the US) if this is the case (eighth time’s a charm).</p>
<p>Finally, there is the possibility of jail time – though this remains somewhat improbable, and it is unwise to speculate around ongoing police investigations.</p>
<p>However, this would be an exceptional circumstance. As <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/16/qa-what-is-the-conservative-election-expenses-row-about">The Guardian has outlined</a>, a recent analogue to this case was Fiona Jones, Labour MP for Newark, who was found guilty of fraud in 1999 – although her case was overturned on appeal. Those wishing to find out more about this subject might want to take a deep dive into the so-called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_and_Out_scandal#House_investigation_and_snap_election">“In and Out Scandal”</a> in Canada. </p>
<h2>Is it only the Conservatives?</h2>
<p>It’s worth repeating that this episode may (or should) change the way elections are run. British journalist Stephen Bush has <a href="https://twitter.com/stephenkb/status/732174738601193478">suggested</a> that election spend could become like the expenses scandal – something that started as a Labour story but became systemic. Indeed, the Electoral Commission seems to state as much:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This is the third investigation we have recently concluded where the largest political parties have failed to report up to six-figure sums following major elections, and have been fined as a result. There is a risk that some political parties might come to view the payment of these fines as a cost of doing business.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Beyond partisan point scoring, there is truly a case to uncover whether the disregard for reporting national and local spend is merely the done thing in the heat of a campaign. And if so, whether these rules are fit for purpose. </p>
<p>The episode will continue to run and run for the Conservatives, potentially leading to some awkward by-elections, and possibly further fines. What will be truly interesting to see is whether the Conservatives face scrutiny regarding these allegations. Last year, only the SNP’s Angus Robertson asked questions in parliament. Although Labour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, has been <a href="https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/842276488196022274">tweeting</a> about the Conservative scandal, sometimes in politics, the really telling things occur in the silence.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74711/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sam Power receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. </span></em></p>It's the biggest financial penalty ever paid by a British political party. Here's how the story unfolded.Sam Power, Doctoral researcher, Sussex Centre for the Study of Corruption, University of SussexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/709142017-01-05T18:23:18Z2017-01-05T18:23:18ZShowing ID at polling stations will not end election fraud<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151815/original/image-20170105-18641-v779j0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Private polls.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-536466367/stock-photo-people-vote-in-a-voting-booth-at-a-polling-station.html?src=mbf6PD95Y-vZlrvF9-l2uw-1-23">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The UK’s former communities secretary, Eric Pickles, ended 2016 by claiming the mantle of defender of British democracy. To combat electoral fraud in local government he <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/27/voters-will-have-show-passports-combat-voter-fraud-vulnerable/">called for new controls to guarantee the probity of voting</a> in municipal elections. Most notably, this would mean the requirement of voters to produce photographic ID before they are allowed into a polling booth.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06255/SN06255.pdf">proposals</a> were <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/josiah-mortimer/electoral-fraud_b_11539640.html">dismissed by some</a> as using “a sledgehammer to crack a nut”. But that metaphor may actually be too generous. The intended target of the reforms may be missed altogether, while the collateral damage to British elections could be significant. Pickles’s sledgehammer is more like a blunderbuss.</p>
<p>The Tory MP argued that <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32428648">recent episodes of electoral fraud</a> in local contests illustrate a wider problem of corruption whereby votes are cast in other people’s names. He proposes that in future, in certain areas, voters should present documentary identification prior to voting at the polling station. </p>
<p>It is true that there have been episodes of electoral fraud in recent years, and, as Mr Pickles states, in strongly diverse communities. One resulted in the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4406575.stm">unseating of three Birmingham councillors in 2005</a> for the mishandling of postal ballots “on an industrial scale”. And a directly-elected mayor in a London borough was <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32428648">accused of falsifying postal vote applications</a> and manipulating voters through community leaders in 2015. But the rarity of these cases demonstrates that Pickles’s proposals are based on an exaggeration of the situation, and likely to be welcomed by divisive extremists. </p>
<p>Nowhere has personation (falsely claiming a voter’s identity) at the polling station been widespread enough to undermine the credibility of a British local election. A House of Commons <a href="http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06255/SN06255.pdf">briefing paper</a> found that the majority of the 224 allegations electoral fraud made to police in 2011 had not been substantiated. And most of those that had been concerned a failure to print agents’ details on posters, or claims of false information issued by candidates. There was only one case of personation that had been the subject of any court proceedings.</p>
<p>Pickles’s proposals for dealing with this supposed problem range from the obstructive to the ineffective, and are mostly impracticable without considerable extra public investment. In all cases they are likely to diminish still further the already shrinking community of municipal voters.</p>
<p>Voters would apparently have to identify themselves using documents such as a passport or driving licence – but these documents are not possessed by all adults. Pickles has also suggested a “voter ID card” might be made available at taxpayers’ expense in the small number of areas where he wants to pilot this idea. But this would exclude those people not determined enough to acquire the card, retain it and then remember it on polling day. </p>
<h2>First past the postal vote</h2>
<p>A far greater potential menace to fair procedure in elections <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26520836">is actually postal voting</a>. Postal (or as it was once known, “absent”) voting was originally used only for members of the armed services overseas, or for others whose occupations made it impossible for them to vote in person. In the 1950s this was extended to those prevented by disability from getting to the polling station. Until 2000, though, the postal vote was for those who could not, rather than chose not, to get there. After 1945 it never accounted for more than 2.6% of votes cast. </p>
<p>Then the Blair government made postal voting an on-demand choice for all voters in the hope of improving sluggish voter turnout. Postal voting surged to represent over 15% of votes cast, yet <a href="http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm">turnout overall fell</a> from 71% to 59%. It was after this that the electoral fraud cases came. It would be unfortunately ironic if Pickles’s measures deterred voters from actually going to the polling station while leaving the more vulnerable option of the postal vote open to anybody who asked (or appeared to ask) for it.</p>
<p>There is a last, potentially sinister twist to Pickles’s proposals. The current idea is that only in 18 authorities will this identification requirement be imposed – all with unusually high ethnic minority populations, mainly Muslim. Pickles makes no apology for pointing to the “vulnerability of some South Asian communities, specifically those with roots in parts of Pakistan or Bangladesh, to electoral fraud”. He accuses those running elections of “turning a blind eye” out of “political correctness.” He is also pressing for documentary proof of nationality to prevent immigrants voting in local elections. </p>
<p>Election Commissioner Richard Mawrey pointedly <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32428648">told the High Court</a> in unseating the mayor of Tower Hamlets: “This is not the consequence of the racial and religious mix of the population.” But the association drawn by Pickles between these communities and electoral fraud, might be regarded by the far right as an acknowledgement of racist sentiments, and by segregationist Islamists as proof of the official persecution they claim their community suffers. </p>
<p>For the great majority of British citizens, regrettably, it will just be seen as another reason not to vote in elections in these areas.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70914/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Cole does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Passports for polling booths should not be a vote winner.Matthew Cole, Teaching Fellow, Department of History, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/589452016-05-06T20:05:25Z2016-05-06T20:05:25ZSadiq Khan: British dream now a reality for London's first Muslim mayor<p>In Pakistan, the chances that the son of a bus or rickshaw driver could secure a high-ranking political position in the country’s capital city are minuscule. But now, the people of London <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/sadiq-khan-wins-london-mayor-election-result-2016-zac-goldsmith-a7017106.html">have elected Sadiq Khan</a> – the son of an immigrant Pakistani bus driver – to be their first Muslim mayor. </p>
<p>While unable to influence the nation’s foreign or economic policy, Khan will <a href="http://www.london.gov.uk/WHAT-WE-DO">have responsibility</a> for key areas in London, such as transport, housing, policing and the environment. And being directly elected gives the London mayor <a href="https://theconversation.com/who-are-the-main-contenders-for-london-mayor-and-what-do-they-stand-for-57391">a personal mandate</a> which no other parliamentarian in Westminster – including those in the cabinet – enjoy. </p>
<p>Khan’s father was one of hundreds of Pakistani men who migrated to Britain in the 1950’s and 1960’s, seeking the UK’s version of the American dream: stable employment, social mobility and opportunities for a better future for themselves and their families. One of eight children, Khan grew up on a council estate in the capital. He went to university to study law and practised as a solicitor in human rights cases before becoming a member of parliament. </p>
<p>Now, at the age of 45, he is mayor of London: the economic and cultural heart of the UK, the largest city in western Europe and one of the most important cities in the world. He is the immigrant success story – for him, the British dream has become a reality. </p>
<h2>Race and religion</h2>
<p>Khan’s Islamic faith catapulted the city’s mayoral contest into the international limelight, at a time when Muslims are facing growing hostility in the West. In the US, presidential hopeful Donald Trump <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/07/donald-trump-ban-all-muslims-entering-us-san-bernardino-shooting">has said</a> that he will ban Muslims from entering the country; while in Europe, the far right is gaining traction by campaigning on <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-protests-germany-idUSKCN0VF0P4">explicitly anti-Muslim platforms</a>. </p>
<p>During the mayoral campaign, Khan’s “Muslimness” was viewed as a liability by some – including members of <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/01/moderate-sadiq-khan-london-mayor-muslim-labour">his own party</a>. His Conservative rival, Zac Goldsmith, accused Khan of <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/24/sadiq-khan-unfit-to-be-london-mayor-says-zac-goldsmith/">sharing platforms</a> with Islamic extremists – the implication was clear: that the public should be wary of his “radical” views. Goldsmith’s highly controversial campaign has been heavily criticised – notably by senior Conservative <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/06/zac-goldsmith-attacked-by-senior-tory-over-tactics-in-london-mayor-election?CMP=share_btn_tw">Andrew Boff</a> – for its divisive <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/media/2016/03/deafening-dogwhistle-zac-goldsmith-s-london-mayoral-campaign-leaflets">“dog-whistle” politics</a>. </p>
<p>Khan’s victory supports what a number of Muslim commentators <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/01/moderate-sadiq-khan-london-mayor-muslim-labour">have argued all along</a>: that having a Muslim mayor could help defeat Islamist ideology, by showing that the West is not anti-Islam – and that Muslims can “make it” there. Khan himself <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/02/a-muslim-mayor-of-london-would-send-message-to-the-haters-says-sadiq-khan">has spoken</a> about the symbolic value of becoming the first Muslim mayor of a city which experienced <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-weve-learned-about-radicalisation-since-7-7-bombings-a-decade-ago-44338">terrorist attacks</a> in 2005, perpetrated in the name of Islam. </p>
<h2>Power and privilege</h2>
<p>But Khan’s victory says as much about social mobility as it does about race and religion. Had Khan’s father stayed in Pakistan, it is inconceivable that his son would have succeeded in that country’s political system, where privilege and connections <a href="http://europe.newsweek.com/power-and-privilege-146857?rm=eu">win elections</a>. There, political office is often viewed as the birth right of the elite. Indeed, the UK has educated a great many of Pakistan’s political leaders: Mohammad Ali Jinnah – the founder of Pakistan – studied in England in the late 19th century. And Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was educated at Oxford, went on to serve as both as prime minister and president.</p>
<p>By contrast, many Pakistanis who migrated to the UK in the post-war era were <a href="http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9781137275158">subsistence farmers and manual labourers</a>. In many cases, they were illiterate in their own mother tongue. They took up positions in the service industries of the south, the factories and foundries of the Midlands and the mills of northern England. And while some succeeded in pulling themselves out of poverty, the UK’s Pakistani community still has some of the <a href="http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/medialibrary/briefingsupdated/Ethnic%20inequalities%20in%20labour%20market%20participation.pdf">highest levels of unemployment</a> and underachievement in the UK. Many British Pakistanis live in some of <a href="http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/medialibrary/briefingsupdated/ethnicity-and-deprivation-in-england-how-likely-are-ethnic-minorities-to-live-in-deprived-neighbourhoods%20(1).pdf">the UK’s most deprived neighbourhoods</a>. </p>
<p>And of course, British politics is also now dominated by an “old boys’ network”: the cliques of Etonions and Bullingdon club members, personified by the prime minister, David Cameron, the chancellor, George Osborne – and indeed London’s outgoing mayor, Boris Johnson. Yet the working-class Khan managed to win out against a Conservative rival with family pedigree, wealth and friends in powerful political, media and business circles. </p>
<p>For many, this is a triumph of meritocracy over privilege – a sign that the political establishment is becoming more inclusive and representative of the ethnic, religious and socioeconomic diversity of the wider population. And Khan is not the only second-generation Pakistani to have entered high political office in the UK. Sajid Javid, the current secretary of state for Business, Innovation and Skills, is the son of a Pakistani immigrant who worked in the mills of the north before becoming a bus driver. So too did the father of Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, who rose to become a member of David Cameron’s cabinet, and was the first Muslim woman to sit at the highest table in the land. In the 2015 general election alone, ten individuals of Pakistani heritage were elected to the British parliament. </p>
<p>And now, in London, the son of a Pakistani immigrant bus driver is in charge. He has become Europe’s most powerful Muslim politician. Khan’s victory has shown us that the British dream can become a reality.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58945/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Parveen Akhtar is the recipient of British Academy and Economic and Social Research Council research grants. This article does not reflect the views of the research councils. </span></em></p>The working-class son of a bus driver has been elected to one of the most important roles in UK politics.Parveen Akhtar, Lecturer in Political Science, Aston Centre for Europe, Aston UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/590132016-05-06T13:16:38Z2016-05-06T13:16:38ZLocal elections: how the parties fared<p>When local elections are held a year into the term of a UK government, it usually sees the electorate (well, those who bother to turn out) expressing their dissatisfaction with the government by voting against councillors from the party of power in Westminster.</p>
<p>After a general election loss, the opposition can often expect to make mid-term wins. Witness, for example, Labour’s achievements at a local level <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/03/local-elections-england-wales-scotland-labour">even in the worst years of the 1980s</a>. This pattern has held over the past half century.</p>
<p>While the council elections taking place across the UK aren’t quite mid-term contests, a year is enough to have some expectations that the government will take a hit. Government ministers usually have to spin narratives about their losses being expected because they are making tough decisions.</p>
<p>On the other side, opposition politicians normally spin from scripts about encouraging progress and how the electorate is starting to realise their terrible mistake at the previous general election.</p>
<p>But the script has had to be changed in 2016, even if no party had to throw it in the bin definitively. </p>
<h2>Labour losses</h2>
<p>The Labour narrative, in particular, has reoriented. This is the result of the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader and the clear attempt to radically shift the party’s political direction.</p>
<p>Labour has made losses across the country but the interpretation of how serious they are really depends on who you ask. It depends heavily on whether the individual genuinely supports the leader, feels obliged to support the leader or is publicly seeking evidence of electoral failure to undermine the leadership.</p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"728531079771004928"}'></div>
<p>In terms of share of the vote it appears that in key wards, Labour is up <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2016-36218450">4% on 2015</a> – not a disaster, but hardly a clear endorsement of Corbyn’s leadership or evidence of a party as yet building towards triumph in 2020. </p>
<p>In other words, too strong a showing for the leader’s many internal enemies to mount a leadership challenge and just sufficient for loyalists to stress the novelty of the Corbyn project and how we are aren’t yet in mid-term.</p>
<p>For England, at least, the changes to the political landscape were quite marginal. Labour made some gains in difficult areas, such as <a href="http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/midlands-local-elections-2016-labour-11292466">Birmingham</a>, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-36219735">Southampton</a> and <a href="http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Mapped-Exeter-election-results-Labour-gain-seats/story-29237694-detail/story.html">Exeter</a> but appeared to be heading for a <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/councils">net loss of 26 councillors across the country</a>.</p>
<p>Even with a victory for Sadiq Khan in the London mayoral race, Labour will find it hard to draw much optimism from the results. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/scottish-election-2016-disaster-for-labour-reality-check-for-the-snp-and-the-tories-are-back-59007">situation in Scotland</a> cannot be spun as anything other than a continuation of the catastrophe that began in the 2015 general election. </p>
<h2>Tories tough it out</h2>
<p>The Conservatives have found it much easier to spin the night as encouraging. Yes the party was down about 4% on its 2015 general election results, and yes this is consistent with Labour being slightly ahead in the country as a whole (when the non-voting areas are considered) as opposed to being behind in the opinion polls. However, the Conservatives ended the night controlling as many councils as at the start and with a net gain of eight councillors.</p>
<p>That’s only a very small positive change but it comes after a year of further austerity and some <a href="https://theconversation.com/iain-duncan-smith-and-george-osborne-a-battle-for-the-conservative-soul-56651">very unpopular decisions</a>.</p>
<h2>UKIP running out of steam?</h2>
<p>UKIP secured very encouraging results in heartlands such as <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-36219178">Thurrock</a>, but overall it gained control of no new councils and had a net gain of just 20 councillors. Furthermore, it is reasonable to argue that given the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/eu-referendum-2016">EU referendum</a> and the fact that everyone is thinking about their main issue, the party should have made more progress – an interpretation regurgitated by UKIP’s opponents all night. Labour has also argued, with some justification, that UKIP had failed to pose a meaningful challenge in its Northern heartlands.</p>
<p>For the Liberal Democrats, the narrative was clearly that a perilous decline has been halted – but this positive message was repeated alongside sombre recognition that the party still has much work to do.</p>
<p>Most years Liberals and Liberal Democrats can be heard predicting that a <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/jun/12/uk.localgovernment6">political realignment is imminent</a>, but this narrative has been disrupted in recent times, as decades of Liberal Democrat progress were <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2016-36220216">reversed</a> by catastrophic losses during the party’s five years in government.</p>
<p>This trend continues with disappointing result in <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2016-36203311">Stockport</a>, a hung council which it had led, and in many areas failed to even begin to start the re-building process. It was the largest party in <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-36219735">Southampton</a> a few years ago, for example, but has failed to win any seats at all this year.</p>
<p>The Liberal Democrats even saw their target ward of <a href="http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/14475271.Labour_keep_control_of_Southampton_on_night_of_drama/">Portswood</a>, which they consistently won for approximately three decades, switch from Conservative to Labour. Across England, the Liberal Democrats <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/councils">retained control of two councils</a> with a net gain of just 13 councillors.</p>
<p>So this election has produced small changes, and sufficient ambiguity for all parties to defend their performance. However the Conservatives are probably most justified in taking satisfaction. Nevertheless, 2020 is a long way ahead and actually these results make little difference to who runs local government.</p>
<p><em>Votes were still being counted when this article was first published.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59013/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Cole does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The picture hasn't shifted much in local councils – but that will cause concern in Labour and sighs of relief among Conservatives.Michael Cole, Lecturer in Organisation and Management, University of LiverpoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/590202016-05-06T13:00:59Z2016-05-06T13:00:59ZWhy Labour under Jeremy Corbyn is stuck on repeat after this poor election showing<p>It seems a long time since anyone speculated about there being a Jeremy Corbyn bounce. Ahead of the local elections, the Labour leader sought to manage expectations by suggesting the party would not lose seats on English councils. The <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2016-36215186">results were mixed</a>. Jeremy Corbyn summed it up when <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36228094">he said</a> the party had “clung on”. </p>
<p>And significantly, Labour fell <a href="https://theconversation.com/scottish-election-2016-disaster-for-labour-reality-check-for-the-snp-and-the-tories-are-back-59007">even further in Scotland</a>. It came in an unthinkable third place in the parliamentary election, behind the Conservatives. Its Welsh constituency position <a href="https://theconversation.com/wales-ukip-and-plaid-gain-new-assembly-seats-as-labour-holds-on-to-power-59012">has also been eroded</a>, down around 7.6% – although the party remains the largest in Cardiff Bay.</p>
<p>It lost councillors in England but fewer than had been projected by some. It held some important councils such as Nuneaton and Exeter (key swing councils) but with a projected national swing against it of around 4%, and in Nuneaton, a swing against the party of 11%. Even with a victory in the London mayoral election for Sadiq Kahn, this is hardly a party which looks like it is heading for government.</p>
<p>In a sign of how low expectations had been managed, Labour’s spokespeople have been out in force spinning this as a reasonable night for the party.</p>
<p>This is the end of a torrid period for Labour. The row about whether it has a <a href="https://theconversation.com/antisemitism-row-why-animosity-on-the-labour-left-still-runs-so-deep-58609">problem with antisemitism</a> has kept the party on the front pages for the wrong reasons. As polls closed, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36218893">Andy Burnham</a>, one of the 2015 leadership contenders, appeared to declare that he would be standing for the post of Manchester mayor in 2017. And UKIP seemed to continue to win over the <a href="https://www.routledge.com/products/9780415661508">“left behind”</a> voters who would once have been Labour’s bedrock.</p>
<p>Estimates are that Labour needs a 13% swing in England to be in a position to win a majority in 2020. According to a recent <a href="https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/wxfhqkufb5/ElectionsDataResults_160216_LabourMembers_Day2.pdf">YouGov survey</a>, only 14% of voters think Labour can win a general election if Corbyn remains leader. Among Labour voters, the figure is only 27%. A third of voters think he should step down now, while 42% of Labour voters think he should lead the party into the general election.</p>
<h2>Stalemate</h2>
<p>The party looks stuck, unable to move forward even if it could agree in which direction to go in. It is caught between a leader who is unpopular among the party’s MPs and the broader electorate, but hugely popular with the <a href="https://theconversation.com/well-labour-this-is-what-happens-when-you-crowdsource-a-leadership-election-45177">large influx</a> of members and supporters that joined the party in 2015 to back his leadership bid. The party is publicly divided on a number of issues – from Europe to Trident.</p>
<p>There are <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/25/corbyn-leadership-challenge-labour-mp-threatens-to-stand-if-may-elections-disappoint">regular rumours</a> about challenges to Corbyn’s leadership. Yet these results are not bad enough for anyone to move against him. Tom Watson, the deputy leader, made an early warning about this during election night when he said it was too early to remove Corbyn.</p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"728377376514531331"}'></div>
<p>MPs, he argued, need to respect the mandate he was given just eight months ago. Historically, Labour has never been good at removing leaders. There were years of half-hearted attempts to remove Gordon Brown and plotting against Ed Miliband.</p>
<p>Corbyn is unlikely to stand down voluntarily and under Labour Party rules, challengers to sitting leaders need to be nominated by 20% of the parliamentary party. While this may appear theoretically possible given internal disquiet, immediate challengers seldom become leaders. A stalking horse would be required. It is far from obvious who that would be, nor what might now trigger such as move given the results overnight were so mixed.</p>
<p>Changes to the party rule book in 2014 mean that Labour leaders are now elected by registered supporters as well as fully paid-up members and a further category of affiliated supporters (who were trade union members that had opted in to support the party). Every member or supporter has one vote. This system was used in 2015 to elect Corbyn.</p>
<p>The many new members who elected Corbyn are highly unlikely to vote for anyone from the right of the party or who has had a part in unseating him. In truth, many Labour members have been looking for someone like Corbyn <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/54068-2/">for a long time</a> and the choices for those disgruntled with Corbyn <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/05/how-should-labours-disgruntled-moderates-behave">are limited</a>.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, this prisoners’ dilemma over the Labour leadership is becoming a bigger problem for Britain more generally. Many Labour members appear <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/16/momentum-labour-party-jeremy-corbyn-politics-john-harris">more interested</a> in controlling the party than entering government. British politics requires a strong opposition to hold the government to account and to challenge for office. Labour seems absent without leave on too many issues since the 2015 general election defeat. Its leadership travails mean the party is failing to set a positive agenda.</p>
<p>The Conservative Party has had the luxury of being able to have its own very <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-michael-gove-david-cameron-brexit-national-security-a6886711.html">public divisions</a> over the EU referendum, and a number of other policy mishaps, without Labour being able to take much benefit. A Labour opposition with sharper instincts should be making much more headway than has been seen in these elections.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59020/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alistair Clark has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council, British Academy, Nuffield Foundation and Leverhulme Trust. He is currently a Trustee of the UK Political Studies Association. This article does not represent the views of the research councils.</span></em></p>It could have been worse, it could have been better. So the party will simply continue to squabble with itself.Alistair Clark, Senior Lecturer in Politics, Newcastle UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/590122016-05-06T10:28:41Z2016-05-06T10:28:41ZWales: UKIP and Plaid gain new assembly seats as Labour holds on to power<p>In the Welsh Assembly elections, much of the story has remained unchanged: Labour has won again, keeping the leading position it has enjoyed since the Senedd was first opened in 1999. </p>
<p>Despite seeing a significant fall in vote share on the last National Assembly election – down <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/wales/results">7.9% across all constituencies</a> – Labour is still well ahead of a divided opposition, and held on to <a href="http://www.itv.com/news/wales/update/2016-05-06/leanne-wood-victory-in-rhondda-shock-result/">all but one</a> of its constituency seats. In total, Labour now has 29 out of the 60 seats altogether – coming in well ahead of the field, and holding on to two regional list seats, as well as the three seats it had been projected to lose: Cardiff North, Cardiff Central and Llanelli.</p>
<p>While these elections at least have heralded no surprises for the winner, the race for second place was an altogether very different matter.</p>
<p>For Plaid Cymru, the night was one of mixed fortunes. Party leader <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/06/labour-wales-plaid-cymru-takes-rhondda-plaid-cymru">Leanne Wood won a famous victory in Rhondda</a> – beating former Labour AM Leighton Andrews, who had held the seat for 13 years – with a <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2016-wales-36207410">24% swing in votes</a> to the party of Wales. Elsewhere, however, Plaid fell short in all their constituency targets, such as Llanelli and Aberconwy. </p>
<p>The Conservatives were among the big losers of the night, losing three seats and their position as the assembly’s second party. They had begun the campaign hoping to make significant gains, having managed to take former Labour strongholds <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-wales-32639473">Gower</a> and Clwyd in the 2015 General Election. But they lost votes, and regional list seats, allowing Plaid Cymru to reclaim its place as second in the Senedd.</p>
<p>But if the Tories were losers, UKIP were in some ways the biggest winners. Although the party slightly under-performed its vote share in recent polls, the night can only be described as a huge success for UKIP. Never having won a seat before in the assembly, it now has a contingent of seven AMs dotted across the country, elected via the regional lists. Former Conservative MP Mark Reckless, the party’s Wales leader Nathan Gill, and former MP Neil Hamilton were among those who made the “breakthrough”, <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/elections-2016-ukip-win-first-seats-in-welsh-assembly-a7016071.html">in the words of Nigel Farage</a>.</p>
<p>For the Liberal Democrats, party leader Kirsty Williams won an impressive personal victory in Brecon and Radnorshire, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/wales-constituencies/W09000041">increasing her majority by 9.3%</a> – 8,170 votes more than prospective Conservative candidate Gary Price. Following the results announcement, Williams promised that the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2016-wales-36222772">party’s rebuild “begins here”</a>, but with her now being the only Lib-Dem in the chamber (down from six elected in 2011) her party will no longer have official recognition in the assembly.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59012/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Roger Scully receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. </span></em></p>All eyes were on the race for second place in the 2016 Welsh Assembly elections.Roger Scully, Professor of Political Science, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/586222016-04-29T15:06:09Z2016-04-29T15:06:09ZTen academics tell you everything you need to know about the May elections<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120692/original/image-20160429-10500-1ysi2zx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s been just one year since Britain’s general election, but all around the UK, people are preparing to go to the polls once more. Mayors will be chosen, councils will be formed and Scotland and Wales will elect new parliaments. </p>
<p>Such elections can be marred by low turnouts – and a <a href="https://theconversation.com/depleted-local-media-threatens-ability-to-hold-those-in-power-to-account-58322">diminished offering from local media</a> isn’t helping. If you’re lacking a motive to vote, let these experts convert you to the democratic cause with their valuable insights, specialist knowledge and sharp (sometimes even scathing) analysis.</p>
<p>Here you’ll find smart summaries of all the key election issues, written by the UK’s brightest minds. </p>
<h2>Why should you care?</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120698/original/image-20160429-10500-19p73dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120698/original/image-20160429-10500-19p73dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=545&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120698/original/image-20160429-10500-19p73dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=545&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120698/original/image-20160429-10500-19p73dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=545&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120698/original/image-20160429-10500-19p73dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=685&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120698/original/image-20160429-10500-19p73dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=685&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120698/original/image-20160429-10500-19p73dy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=685&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Get there.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Peter Turner Photography/Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These polls have been somewhat overshadowed by the hue and cry over the <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/eu-referendum-2016">EU referendum</a>, but they’re still pretty important. Alistair Clark (Newcastle University) <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-you-should-care-about-the-local-elections-58263">explains what’s at stake</a> during England’s local elections; there are more than 2,700 seats up for grabs, for starters. </p>
<h2>Your report from the north</h2>
<p>In Scotland, the election seems a foregone conclusion: the SNP is expected to dominate. But if you think that’s all there is to say about it, you’re dead wrong – according to politics and policy expert Paul Cairney (Stirling), there are at least <a href="https://theconversation.com/scottish-election-2016-six-things-you-need-to-know-57993">six things you should know</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120694/original/image-20160429-10493-17ednkr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120694/original/image-20160429-10493-17ednkr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=326&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120694/original/image-20160429-10493-17ednkr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=326&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120694/original/image-20160429-10493-17ednkr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=326&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120694/original/image-20160429-10493-17ednkr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=410&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120694/original/image-20160429-10493-17ednkr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=410&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120694/original/image-20160429-10493-17ednkr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=410&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bonnie Scotland.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/24354425@N03/15134270922/sizes/l">sjrankin/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And with an impending SNP victory at hand, many are wondering whether the possibility of Scottish independence will increase again – especially with the EU referendum looming. Would a Brexit break Britain? Michael Keating (Aberdeen) <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-or-out-of-the-eu-britain-faces-more-scottish-upheaval-58606">talks us through</a> the likely scenarios. </p>
<h2>And what about Wales?</h2>
<p>Meanwhile, Stephen Cushion and Roger Scully (Cardiff University) use four graphs to show that <a href="https://theconversation.com/british-media-is-failing-to-give-voters-the-full-picture-ahead-of-elections-57020">Wales is woefully neglected</a> by the national media. </p>
<p>Labour looks set to win the lion’s share of Senedd seats. But the race for second place is heating up, with a surprise last-minute entry: UKIP. Jac Larner (Cardiff Universtiy) explains how the Welsh electoral system will give it a chance to <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-welsh-voting-system-could-secure-nine-assembly-seats-for-ukip-55185">turn local support into seats</a>.</p>
<h2>The march of the mayors</h2>
<p>Voters in London, Salford, Liverpool and Bristol will be asked which candidate they want to be mayor of their cities. If you’re somewhat stymied about the point of elected mayors, you’re not alone: Peter Wynne Rees (UCL) is convinced that London would be <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-london-really-need-an-elected-mayor-58533">better off without one</a>. </p>
<p>Fortunately, Paula Keaveney (Edge Hill University) <a href="https://theconversation.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-mayoral-elections-58319">can explain</a> what mayors do, why we have them and – perhaps most importantly – how to vote for them. </p>
<p>Expect more mayoral elections next year, as George Osborne’s city devolution deals take effect. But in some ways, the role is old news – as John Godwin (University of Bristol) points out, <a href="https://theconversation.com/echoes-of-the-distant-past-in-englands-modern-battles-to-be-mayor-57767">it’s been 900 years</a> since England’s first mayor was appointed. </p>
<h2>The low-down from London town</h2>
<p>Finally, for those in the country’s capital, we’ve got you covered. If you only read one article about the London mayoral elections, make it Tom Quinn’s (University of Essex) <a href="https://theconversation.com/who-are-the-main-contenders-for-london-mayor-and-what-do-they-stand-for-57391">no-nonsense introduction</a> to the two main candidates. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120696/original/image-20160429-10474-18wuaul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120696/original/image-20160429-10474-18wuaul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=348&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120696/original/image-20160429-10474-18wuaul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=348&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120696/original/image-20160429-10474-18wuaul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=348&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120696/original/image-20160429-10474-18wuaul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=438&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120696/original/image-20160429-10474-18wuaul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=438&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/120696/original/image-20160429-10474-18wuaul.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=438&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Be enlightened.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Our experts have also picked apart the key contenders’ pledges on <a href="https://theconversation.com/public-transport-is-part-of-the-london-mayors-raison-detre-but-both-main-candidates-fail-to-impress-58390">public transport</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/which-london-mayoral-candidate-does-most-to-make-cycling-mainstream-58001">cycling</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-heathrow-problem-and-how-london-mayoral-candidates-can-handle-it-58008">airports</a>. Oh, and Michael Carmona (UCL) has a <a href="https://theconversation.com/unlocking-small-spaces-could-be-the-key-to-solving-londons-housing-crisis-57392">solution to the housing crisis</a>. </p>
<p><em>For the latest updates about the elections, make sure you follow us on <a href="https://twitter.com/ConversationUK">Twitter</a>. If you have any feedback about our coverage, please feel free to post it in the comments.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58622/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Scotland and Wales are getting new parliaments, major cities are electing their mayors and there are over 2,700 local seats up for grabs.Emily Lindsay Brown, Editor for Cities and Young People, UK editionLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/414762015-05-11T10:22:49Z2015-05-11T10:22:49ZBritain's election results may prove to be a blow to US foreign policy goals<p>After last week’s elections, British politics is at a unique turning point and perhaps so is US policy, where in a tumultuous world, Great Britain has heretofore been a steadfast US ally. </p>
<p>The final vote on Thursday, May 7, confounded many political observers on both sides of the pond.</p>
<p>According to <a href="http://www.may2015.com/category/seat-calculator/">pre-election polls,</a> the two major parties, Conservatives and Labour, were neck and neck with no clear indication of which would win the largest number of votes. Early polls seemed to indicate British voters were put off both by the prospects of further Tory austerity and a Labour alliance with a left-leaning Scottish party that wanted to dismantle the country. </p>
<p>Even if, for example, the largest number of votes had accrued to the Labour Party, party leader Ed Milliband would likely have had to somehow partner with Nicola Sturgeon’s Scottish National Party (SNP) to obtain a governing majority. Despite defeat of the <a href="https://www.scotreferendum.com">referendum</a> on Scottish independence on September 18, 2014, the SNP remains committed to securing Scotland’s independence from the UK and, in any case, to <a href="http://www.snp.org/sites/default/files/page/file/04_16d_snp_election_manifesto_290x280x.pdf.">eliminating</a> British nuclear submarines from its territory. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/l0sjZXVkYKU?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Protests in Scotland over Trident subs.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By contrast, if David Cameron’s Tories had come out ahead, no matter who they might have partnered with to form a government (perhaps Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats again), Cameron was committed to holding a referendum on Britain’s membership in the EU by the end of 2017, and probably to enacting further cuts in Britain’s defense establishment, which would erode its capacity to field troops in any significant foreign engagements. </p>
<p>In other words, no matter which of the two main parties came out ahead in Thursday’s election, America’s defense posture would be significantly impacted. If the Tories won, no longer would American policymakers be able to count on Britain to send its troops into battle alongside American allies as it has in the past, both in Iraq and Afghanistan. If Labour came out ahead, the US likely would have to adjust its nuclear deterrent force to compensate for <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28009977">Britain’s withdrawal</a> of nuclear submarines from Scotland.</p>
<h2>What the final election results now mean for US foreign policy</h2>
<p>So, thus far, what do the final results indicate? In vivid contrast to expectations raised by advance polls, the Tories won a <a href="https://theconversation.com/conservatives-defy-forecasts-to-secure-victory-in-uk-election-41400">clear majority</a>; Labour and the Liberal Democrats have been trounced to the extent that both <a href="http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/uk-general-election/ed-miliband-nick-clegg-and-nigel-farage-all-resign-following-election-disaster-in-the-uk-31206243.html">Ed Milliband and Nick Clegg</a> resigned from their respective leadership positions. </p>
<p>However, as expected, the SNP has emerged victorious in Scotland, winning 56 of 59 seats and, as a result, nearly <a href="https://theconversation.com/britains-election-is-over-so-what-does-it-all-mean-41261">destroying</a> Labour’s traditional base there.</p>
<p>Given the SNP’s commitment to eliminating the UK’s Trident submarine program in Scotland, and the Conservatives’ intent to hold a referendum on Britain’s departure from the EU – further reinforcing Britain’s decline as a player on the global stage – America may find itself very much alone in dealing with ISIS and other threats to international peace and security. </p>
<p>All this means that, on a deeper level, the American-British <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Relationship">“special relationship”</a> will be impacted. Together with China’s rapidly escalating global financial, economic and military clout plus Russia’s Vladimir Putin’s Machiavellian machinations concerning Ukraine’s sovereignty, the British elections should give American policymakers pause for deep concern and reflection.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41476/count.gif" alt="La Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dennis JD Sandole ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d&#39;une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n&#39;a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son poste universitaire.</span></em></p>The decisive Conservative victory in the UK may deal a blow to the "special relationship" with the United States on issues of global defense and security.Dennis JD Sandole, Professor of Conflict Resolution and International Relations, George Mason UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/415502015-05-11T05:26:30Z2015-05-11T05:26:30ZEuropean reactions to the UK election result<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/81125/original/image-20150510-22733-1j1xfnh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">As much of a surprise for those on the mainland. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/charlesfred/2827506912/in/photolist-5iRHib-ekBx28-dvRx6R-fsYyTM-5zNum3-78Yvjs-2ipDVE-g62aa-4UKDRo-q5dyUP-4iJjyS-8KGyt-gUWZx-8tgQcJ-4GnN79-gLwXKN-fYWh6-5pXX25-dEpG5A-qGUz4M-pnbZdd-ey5CVs-mLikEZ-b1VKuK-pB92Sx-fyydD5-ekHnro-EtgMZ-8zkNAV-eLDm8-6iBan-4Pe2Qp-dRU16M-c4kfjQ-9Cn5fa-6TvTn1-dVvjh3-7ajhf-aCEwos-9MnNXk-8BeGEd-dUYmLi-nqVizp-b7tDnn-9s6y9F-nHUGD2-7ajhh-AJf9t-4P76Lr-qmrBHo">Charles Roffey</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>We’ve seen plenty of reaction to the unexpected results of the UK 2015 general election, but as an EU member state with an in-or-out referendum as early as next year, what do other key EU players think of the results? A panel of experts gives us the view from Europe.</em></p>
<hr>
<h2>France</h2>
<p><strong>Aurelien Mondon, Lecturer in French politics, University of Bath</strong> </p>
<p>The UK general election dominated most French news websites on the morning of May 8, from left-wing Libération, to centre Le Monde and right-wing Le Figaro. However, their coverage has focused on very different aspects of the results, highlighting the newspapers’ political preferences.</p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"596658588304732160"}'></div>
<p>Overall, for Le Monde, the main story was <a href="http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2015/05/08/elections-au-royaume-uni-le-ukip-troisieme-parti-du-pays-mais-presque-aucun-siege_4630078_3214.html">the strange output of the UK’s electoral system</a> – the morning’s main headline hinted at the inconsistency between results and members of parliament, and for UKIP in particular: “UKIP 3rd in the polls, but not in Westminster”. </p>
<p>Another prominent article is dedicated to the SNP sensation and the Scottish move toward “<a href="http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2015/05/08/l-ecosse-en-situation-de-secession-electorale_4629966_3214.html">electoral secession</a>”. </p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"596586413862342656"}'></div>
<p>For Le Figaro, the main story was David Cameron’s “<a href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2015/05/08/01003-20150508ARTFIG00016-large-victoire-de-david-cameron-aux-elections-britanniques.php">total victory</a>” and the many failures of <a href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2015/05/08/01003-20150508ARTFIG00031-la-triple-defaite-d-ed-miliband.php">Labour’s strategy</a>. The newspaper <a href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2015/05/08/97001-20150508FILWWW00078-cameron-a-gagne-par-courage-de-reformer-le-roux.php">also published an interview</a> with a senior French Socialist MP, praising Cameron’s “courage to reform”; a telling account from the failing Parti Socialiste. </p>
<p>While Libération euphemistically announced “Cameron returned to power”, <a href="http://www.liberation.fr/monde/2015/05/08/royaume-uni-david-cameron-reconduit-le-labour-lamine_1298748">placing the emphasis</a> on “Labour taking a pounding” for <a href="http://www.leparisien.fr/">Le Parisien</a>, the election was relegated to the second order of stories, and the focus of one of the two main articles examined the reasons why pollsters got it so wrong. </p>
<p>Finally, independent news website Mediapart provided in-depth coverage of the “<a href="http://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/dossier/dossier-elections-au-royaume-desuni">disunited Kingdom</a>”.</p>
<p>However eclectic the coverage, one key issue has oddly been ignored at first: the in-out EU referendum promised by the Conservatives. Despite the very real repercussions a Brexit would have on France and Europe as a whole it’s nowhere in the coverage. In France, it seems, ignorance is bliss.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Germany</h2>
<p><strong>Isabelle Hertner, Deputy Director, Institute for German Studies, University of Birmingham</strong></p>
<p>Centre-left news magazine Der Spiegel <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/parlamentswahl-in-grossbritannien-die-wichtigsten-fakten-a-1029003.html">labelled the UK election</a> as a “duel of the unwanted”, describing Cameron as a snob who had disappointed voters with rising living costs, and decrying Ed Miliband as a bad speaker and an unpopular party leader who would make a bad head of government. </p>
<p>While <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/grossbritannien-wahl-david-cameron-muss-um-amt-bangen-a-1032594.html#ref=veeseoartikel">it noted</a> that domestic concerns like immigration and the future of the NHS dominated the campaign, in stark contrast to French counterparts, the German press focused on the question of the UK’s EU membership, the success of the SNP and the implications of both for the future of the UK and Europe. </p>
<p>Germany has always perceived Britain as a key ally in the EU, but there’s growing disillusionment with the UK’s awkwardness among the largely pro-European German political elites and newspapers. Der Spiegel declared Cameron’s victory “bad news for Europe”, arguing that his small majority <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/grossbritannien-kommentar-zu-camerons-wahlsieg-a-1032731.html">left him open to blackmail</a>: “His eurosceptic squallers on the backbenches, who have been setting the tone over the past five years, will become even more powerful.”</p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"596612110056038400"}'></div>
<p>An in-out referendum which led to the UK leaving, <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/parlamentswahl-in-grossbritannien-die-wichtigsten-fakten-a-1029003.html">the publication says</a>, would not only mean the EU lost “a net contributor” but would also be a major setback for European integration.</p>
<p>Der Spiegel <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/nigel-farage-ukip-chef-der-mann-der-england-aufstachelt-a-1029472.html">wrote mockingly</a> about Nigel Farage’s campaign: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>He has the bonhomie of a used car salesman who hasn’t changed his wardrobe since 1987. The people in the room like that. It reminds them of the glorious days when Great Britain could take its own decisions, and was not, as Farage argues, remote-controlled by an octopus from Brussels.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And there was barely-concealed schadenfreude over Farage’s own failure to win a seat. But centre-right newspaper, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, <a href="http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/ukip-rechtspopulist-farage-verliert-und-tritt-zurueck-13581919.html">wrote that</a> UKIP would now play no big formal role “against all hopes”: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Farage’s offer … to tolerate Cameron’s government under certain conditions, seems presumptuous now. Back then it was thought that the elections would bring such a narrow result that the support of a fringe party might become necessary. Since Cameron’s strong victory, this has become redundant. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>A statement by former SNP leader, Alex Salmond, that “<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2015/may/08/alex-salmond-general-election-gordon-snp-video">The Scottish Lion has roared</a>” was picked up by leading centre-left Süddeutsche Zeitung, which commented: “It reminds us of the situation here in Bavaria.” Indeed, there is a small separatist movement in Bavaria and the Bavarian coat of arms is, coincidentally, decorated with lions. There is some sympathy for Scottish separatism in this part of Germany.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Italy</h2>
<p><strong>Duncan McDonnell, Senior Lecturer, Griffith University</strong></p>
<p>The main Italian dailies identified leadership as a key reason for the UK election result. In a piece entitled “<a href="http://franceschini.blogautore.repubblica.it/2015/05/08/ridateci-blair/">Give us back Blair</a>”, La Repubblica’s London correspondent, Enrico Franceschini, wrote: “With Blair, the Labour Party won three elections in a row; since then it has lost two elections under leaders that distanced themselves from Blair – first Gordon Brown, now Ed Miliband”. Franceschini added that the party might now consider the “more reformist, pro-business, more Blairite” David Miliband <a href="http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/article1534554.ece">as its next leader</a> – though it is unclear whether he can or will return. </p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"596637615048269824"}'></div>
<p>Meanwhile, Fabio Cavalera of the Corriere della Sera <a href="http://www.corriere.it/esteri/15_maggio_08/regno-unito-exit-poll-perche-cameron-ha-conquistato-inglesi-4efcf4de-f505-11e4-83c3-0865d0e5485f.shtml">remained true</a> to the journalistic tradition of <a href="https://theconversation.com/abbott-rudd-and-de-blasio-many-things-but-not-populists-18390">misusing the term “populism”</a> by claiming that Miliband’s “left-wing populism frightened moderates and did not convince his core voters”. He also argued that Cameron had been able to take advantage of a “feel-good factor” brought about by public optimism in the economy. Likewise, Alberto Simoni in La Stampa <a href="http://www.lastampa.it/2015/05/08/esteri/chi-ha-vinto-chi-ha-perso-e-perch-hhlKIhSGfXxPt3wHsi0FwL/pagina.html">says</a> that Cameron won because he was able “to convince the English that he was on the right road” with the economy. </p>
<p>In the best quality Italian newspaper, Il Sole 24 Ore, Leonardo Maisano <a href="http://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/mondo/2015-05-08/ora-referendum-ue-110505.shtml?uuid=ABgXPjcD">looks ahead</a> to the referendum on the UK’s EU membership and its possible consequences, concluding that “if London were to leave the union, Edinburgh would almost certainly try to leave the UK”.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Spain</h2>
<p><strong>Jose Fernandez-Albertos, Research Fellow, Spanish National Research Council</strong></p>
<p>In Spain, there were three distinctive national readings of the results. Being only two weeks ahead of <a href="https://www.thespainreport.com/category/major/politics/elections-in-spain/">regional and local elections</a>, the conservative Spanish government was <a href="http://t.co/kzLu9rVd79">quick to celebrate</a> the Tory victory as a triumph of “responsible” and “reformist” governments contested by public opinion and troubles in electoral polls. This is unsurprising given that Spain’s ruling People’s Party is expected to suffer <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/05/07/uk-spain-politics-idUKKBN0NS14E20150507">significant losses</a>.</p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"596799548292476928"}'></div>
<p>The fragmentation of Britain’s party system along national lines strikes an obvious chord with Spaniards. It is not difficult to draw a parallel between the fate of the Labour party (swamped by nationalism in Scotland, and damaged by the reaction to that very nationalism in England) to the experience of Spanish socialists in the last decade – <a href="https://theconversation.com/scotland-vote-may-change-little-in-catalonia-but-camerons-an-unlikely-hero-there-31652">penalised in Catalonia</a> for not being pro-secessionist, and in the rest of Spain for being too accommodating to Catalan demands. </p>
<p>If Spain’s experience offers the UK any lessons, it is that the electoral incentives created by the surge of nationalism at each side of the border will make the politics of devolution increasingly conflicted over the coming years.</p>
<p>A possible lesson that the Spanish public might draw from the British results is that small parties face huge existential risks when they decide to behave “responsibly” and participate in multi-party governments, as befell the <a href="https://theconversation.com/lib-dem-wipeout-prompts-clegg-to-hint-he-will-step-down-41512">Liberal Democrats</a>. This might be a serious problem for Spain in the near future. </p>
<p>Spain is the only large country in the EU that has never had a coalition government since the re-establishment of democracy. It is almost certain that no party will be able to command an absolute majority in parliament in the December general election, and new parties (the anti-austerity Podemos and the centrist Ciudadanos) are already proving reluctant to collaborate with established ones. The spectacle of the Liberal Democrats’ collapse will do nothing to change their minds.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Greece</h2>
<p><strong>Spyros Economides, London School of Economics</strong></p>
<p>The British election results were met with a degree of curiosity in Greece. Apart from the surprise at the extent of the Conservative majority, a sentiment shared by all observing and participating (in) the election, there was a degree of hidden admiration for the success managed by Cameron and his team. </p>
<p>But behind this admiration are two big concerns both for the left-wing <a href="https://theconversation.com/syriza-sweeps-to-victory-in-greek-election-promising-an-end-to-humiliation-36680">Syriza</a> government in Greece, and the electorate at large. </p>
<div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props='{"tweetId":"596565398113386496"}'></div>
<p>The first worry is the spectacle of a government that implemented an extensive austerity programme, including significant cuts in welfare and general public spending, winning an election by a surprisingly wide margin. This does not fit the narrative of the Syriza government’s commitment to a more expansive public spending, and, more importantly, it undermines the party’s very raison d'etre as the champion of anti-austerity, a stance endorsed by the resounding electoral success it won in January 2015. </p>
<p>Despite the vast difference in the structure and capacities of the economies of the UK and Greece, the fact that a significant proportion of the British electorate think austerity has improved the economy challenges many of the assumptions of those who see an EU sponsored austerity programme as the root of all evils.</p>
<p>Which brings us to the second set of concerns: the election’s European implications. <a href="http://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2015/05/05/poll-majority-of-greeks-want-the-euro-even-with-a-new-bailout-deal/">Opinion polls</a> in Greece overwhelmingly indicate that the public wants to remain in the eurozone, and by implication the EU. But part of the Tory government’s economic success can be put down to non-membership of the euro – and now we face a tough debate on a possible Brexit. </p>
<p>Where does this leave the euro/EU debate in Greece? Will it strengthen the hand of those on the extreme left of Syriza, who foolishly believe in a Grexit and a new drachma? However the government responds, the UK’s contradictory signals could have serious implications for the Greek system.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41550/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Duncan McDonnell has previously received research funding from the European Union, the Swiss National Science Foundation and the UK Leverhulme Trust. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aurelien Mondon, Isabelle Hertner, José Fernández-Albertos, and Spyros Economides do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>How did others in Europe cover the election and the surprising results?Aurelien Mondon, Lecturer in French and Comparative Politics, University of BathDuncan McDonnell, Senior Lecturer, School of Government and International Relations, Griffith UniversityIsabelle Hertner, Lecturer in German and European Politics and Society, Deputy Director of the Institute for German Studies, University of BirminghamJosé Fernández-Albertos, Permanent Research Fellow , Spanish National Research CouncilSpyros Economides, Associate Professor of International Relations and European Politics, London School of Economics and Political ScienceLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.